Search Results

Search found 9432 results on 378 pages for 'yii mvc'.

Page 3/378 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Running ASP.NET Webforms and ASP.NET MVC side by side

    - by rajbk
    One of the nice things about ASP.NET MVC and its older brother ASP.NET WebForms is that they are both built on top of the ASP.NET runtime environment. The advantage of this is that, you can still run them side by side even though MVC and WebForms are different frameworks. Another point to note is that with the release of the ASP.NET routing in .NET 3.5 SP1, we are able to create SEO friendly URLs that do not map to specific files on disk. The routing is part of the core runtime environment and therefore can be used by both WebForms and MVC. To run both frameworks side by side, we could easily create a separate folder in your MVC project for all our WebForm files and be good to go. What this post shows you instead, is how to have an MVC application with WebForm pages  that both use a common master page and common routing for SEO friendly URLs.  A sample project that shows WebForms and MVC running side by side is attached at the bottom of this post. So why would we want to run WebForms and MVC in the same project?  WebForms come with a lot of nice server controls that provide a lot of functionality. One example is the ReportViewer control. Using this control and client report definition files (RDLC), we can create rich interactive reports (with charting controls). I show you how to use the ReportViewer control in a WebForm project here :  Creating an ASP.NET report using Visual Studio 2010. We can create even more advanced reports by using SQL reporting services that can also be rendered by the ReportViewer control. Now, consider the sample MVC application I blogged about called ASP.NET MVC Paging/Sorting/Filtering using the MVCContrib Grid and Pager. Assume you were given the requirement to add a UI to the MVC application where users could interact with a report and be given the option to export the report to Excel, PDF or Word. How do you go about doing it?   This is a perfect scenario to use the ReportViewer control and RDLCs. As you saw in the post on creating the ASP.NET report, the ReportViewer control is a Web Control and is designed to be run in a WebForm project with dependencies on, amongst others, a ScriptManager control and the beloved Viewstate.  Since MVC and WebForm both run under the same runtime, the easiest thing to is to add the WebForm application files (index.aspx, rdlc, related class files) into our MVC project. You can copy the files over from the WebForm project into the MVC project. Create a new folder in our MVC application called CommonReports. Add the index.aspx and rdlc file from the Webform project   Right click on the Index.aspx file and convert it to a web application. This will add the index.aspx.designer.cs file (this step is not required if you are manually adding a WebForm aspx file into the MVC project).    Verify that all the type names for the ObjectDataSources in code behind to point to the correct ProductRepository and fix any compiler errors. Right click on Index.aspx and select “View in browser”. You should see a screen like the one below:   There are two issues with our page. It does not use our site master page and the URL is not SEO friendly. Common Master Page The easiest way to use master pages with both MVC and WebForm pages is to have a common master page that each inherits from as shown below. The reason for this is most WebForm controls require them to be inside a Form control and require ControlState or ViewState. ViewMasterPages used in MVC, on the other hand, are designed to be used with content pages that derive from ViewPage with Viewstate turned off. By having a separate master page for MVC and WebForm that inherit from the Root master page,, we can set properties that are specific to each. For example, in the Webform master, we can turn on ViewState, add a form tag etc. Another point worth noting is that if you set a WebForm page to use a MVC site master page, you may run into errors like the following: A ViewMasterPage can be used only with content pages that derive from ViewPage or ViewPage<TViewItem> or Control 'MainContent_MyButton' of type 'Button' must be placed inside a form tag with runat=server. Since the ViewMasterPage inherits from MasterPage as seen below, we make our Root.master inherit from MasterPage, MVC.master inherit from ViewMasterPage and Webform.master inherits from MasterPage. We define the attributes on the master pages like so: Root.master <%@ Master Inherits="System.Web.UI.MasterPage"  … %> MVC.master <%@ Master MasterPageFile="~/Views/Shared/Root.Master" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewMasterPage" … %> WebForm.master <%@ Master MasterPageFile="~/Views/Shared/Root.Master" Inherits="NorthwindSales.Views.Shared.Webform" %> Code behind: public partial class Webform : System.Web.UI.MasterPage {} We make changes to our reports aspx file to use the Webform.master. See the source of the master pages in the sample project for a better understanding of how they are connected. SEO friendly links We want to create SEO friendly links that point to our report. A request to /Reports/Products should render the report located in ~/CommonReports/Products.aspx. Simillarly to support future reports, a request to /Reports/Sales should render a report in ~/CommonReports/Sales.aspx. Lets start by renaming our index.aspx file to Products.aspx to be consistent with our routing criteria above. As mentioned earlier, since routing is part of the core runtime environment, we ca easily create a custom route for our reports by adding an entry in Global.asax. public static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes) { routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}");   //Custom route for reports routes.MapPageRoute( "ReportRoute", // Route name "Reports/{reportname}", // URL "~/CommonReports/{reportname}.aspx" // File );     routes.MapRoute( "Default", // Route name "{controller}/{action}/{id}", // URL with parameters new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional } // Parameter defaults ); } With our custom route in place, a request to Reports/Employees will render the page at ~/CommonReports/Employees.aspx. We make this custom route the first entry since the routing system walks the table from top to bottom, and the first route to match wins. Note that it is highly recommended that you write unit tests for your routes to ensure that the mappings you defined are correct. Common Menu Structure The master page in our original MVC project had a menu structure like so: <ul id="menu"> <li> <%=Html.ActionLink("Home", "Index", "Home") %></li> <li> <%=Html.ActionLink("Products", "Index", "Products") %></li> <li> <%=Html.ActionLink("Help", "Help", "Home") %></li> </ul> We want this menu structure to be common to all pages/views and hence should reside in Root.master. Unfortunately the Html.ActionLink helpers will not work since Root.master inherits from MasterPage which does not have the helper methods available. The quickest way to resolve this issue is to use RouteUrl expressions. Using  RouteUrl expressions, we can programmatically generate URLs that are based on route definitions. By specifying parameter values and a route name if required, we get back a URL string that corresponds to a matching route. We move our menu structure to Root.master and change it to use RouteUrl expressions: <ul id="menu"> <li> <asp:HyperLink ID="hypHome" runat="server" NavigateUrl="<%$RouteUrl:routename=default,controller=home,action=index%>">Home</asp:HyperLink></li> <li> <asp:HyperLink ID="hypProducts" runat="server" NavigateUrl="<%$RouteUrl:routename=default,controller=products,action=index%>">Products</asp:HyperLink></li> <li> <asp:HyperLink ID="hypReport" runat="server" NavigateUrl="<%$RouteUrl:routename=ReportRoute,reportname=products%>">Product Report</asp:HyperLink></li> <li> <asp:HyperLink ID="hypHelp" runat="server" NavigateUrl="<%$RouteUrl:routename=default,controller=home,action=help%>">Help</asp:HyperLink></li> </ul> We are done adding the common navigation to our application. The application now uses a common theme, routing and navigation structure. Conclusion We have seen how to do the following through this post Add a WebForm page from a WebForm project to an existing ASP.NET MVC application Use a common master page for both WebForm and MVC pages Use routing for SEO friendly links Use a common menu structure for both WebForm and MVC. The sample project is attached below. Version: VS 2010 RTM Remember to change your connection string to point to your Northwind database NorthwindSalesMVCWebform.zip

    Read the article

  • Special 48-Hour Offer: Free ASP.NET MVC 3 Video Training

    - by ScottGu
    The Virtual ASP.NET MVC Conference (MVCConf) happened earlier today.  Several thousand developers attended the event online, and had the opportunity to watch 27 great talks presented by the community. All of the live presentations were recorded, and videos of them will be posted shortly so that everyone can watch them (for free).  I’ll do a blog post with links to them once they are available. Special Pluralsight Training Available for Next 48 Hours In my MVCConf keynote this morning, I also mentioned a special offer that Pluralsight (a great .NET training partner) is offering – which is the opportunity to watch their excellent ASP.NET MVC 3 Fundamentals course free of charge for the next 48 hours.  This training is 3 hours and 17 minutes long and covers the new features introduced with ASP.NET MVC 3 including: Razor, Unobtrusive JavaScript, Richer Validation, ViewBag, Output Caching, Global Action Filters, NuGet, Dependency Injection, and much more. Scott Allen is the presenter, and the format, video player, and cadence of the course is really great.  It provides an excellent way to quickly come up to speed with all of the new features introduced with the new ASP.NET MVC 3 release. Click here to watch the Pluralsight training - available free of charge for the next 48 hours (until Thursday at 9pm PST). Other Beginning ASP.NET MVC Tutorials We will be publishing a bunch of new ASP.NET MVC 3 content, training and samples on the http://asp.net/mvc web-site in the weeks ahead.  We’ll include content that is tailored to developers brand-new to ASP.NET MVC, as well as content for advanced ASP.NET MVC developers looking to get the most out of it. Below are two tutorials available today that provide nice introductory step-by-step ASP.NET MVC 3 tutorials: Build your First ASP.NET MVC 3 Application ASP.NET MVC Music Store Tutorial I recommend reviewing both of the above tutorials if you are looking to get started with ASP.NET MVC 3 and want to learn the core concepts and features behind it. Hope this helps, Scott

    Read the article

  • How to fix: Handler “PageHandlerFactory-Integrated” has a bad module “ManagedPipelineHandler” in its module list

    - by ybbest
    Issue: Recently, I am having issues with deploying asp.net mvc 4 application to Windows Server 2008 R2.After add the necessary role and features and I setup an application in IIS. However , I received the following error message: PageHandlerFactory-Integrated” has a bad module “ManagedPipelineHandler” in its module list   Solution: It turns out that this is because ASP.Net was not completely installed with IIS even though I checked that box in the “Add Feature” dialog.   To fix this, I simply ran the following command at the command prompt %windir%\Microsoft.NET\Framework64\v4.0.30319\aspnet_regiis.exe -i If I had been on a 32 bit system, it would have looked like the following: %windir%\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v4.0.21006\aspnet_regiis.exe –i   References: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6846544/how-to-fix-handler-pagehandlerfactory-integrated-has-a-bad-module-managedpip

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 3 Hosting :: How to Upgrade ASP.NET MVC 2 Project to ASP.NET MVC 3

    - by mbridge
    ASP.NET MVC 3 can be installed side by side with ASP.NET MVC 2 on the same computer, which gives you flexibility in choosing when to upgrade an ASP.NET MVC 2 application to ASP.NET MVC 3. The simplest way to upgrade is to create a new ASP.NET MVC 3 project and copy all the views, controllers, code, and content files from the existing MVC 2 project to the new project and then to update the assembly references in the new project to match the old project. If you have made changes to the Web.config file in the MVC 2 project, you must also merge those changes with the Web.config file in the MVC 3 project. To manually upgrade an existing ASP.NET MVC 2 application to version 3, do the following: 1. In both Web.config files in the MVC 3 project, globally search and replace the MVC version. Find the following: System.Web.Mvc, Version=2.0.0.0 Replace it with the following System.Web.Mvc, Version=3.0.0.0 There are three changes in the root Web.config and four in the Views\Web.config file. 2. In Solution Explorer, delete the reference to System.Web.Mvc (which points to the version 2 DLL). Then add a reference to System.Web.Mvc (v3.0.0.0). 3. In Solution Explorer, right-click the project name and then select Unload Project. Then right-click again and select Edit ProjectName.csproj. 4. Locate the ProjectTypeGuids element and replace {F85E285D-A4E0-4152-9332-AB1D724D3325} with {E53F8FEA-EAE0-44A6-8774-FFD645390401}. 5. Save the changes and then right-click the project and select Reload Project. 6. If the project references any third-party libraries that are compiled using ASP.NET MVC 2, add the following highlighted bindingRedirect element to the Web.config file in the application root under the configuration section: <runtime>   <assemblyBinding >     <dependentAssembly>       <assemblyIdentity name="System.Web.Mvc"           publicKeyToken="31bf3856ad364e35"/>       <bindingRedirect oldVersion="2.0.0.0" newVersion="3.0.0.0"/>     </dependentAssembly>   </assemblyBinding> </runtime> Another ASP.NET MVC 3 article: - Rolling with Razor in MVC v3 Preview - Deploying ASP.NET MVC 3 web application to server where ASP.NET MVC 3 is not installed - RenderAction with ASP.NET MVC 3 Sessionless Controllers

    Read the article

  • Upgarde from Asp.Net MVC 1 to MVC 2 - how to and issues with JsonRequestBehavior

    - by Renso
    Goal Upgrade your MVC 1 app to MVC 2 Issues You may get errors about your Json data being returned via a GET request violating security principles - we also address this here. This post is not intended to delve into why the Json GET request is or may be an issue, just how to resolve it as part of upgrading from MVC1 to 2. Solution First remove all references from your projects to the MVC 1 dll and replace it with the MVC 2 dll. Now update your web.config file in your web app root folder by simply changing references to assembly="System.Web.Mvc, Version 1.0.0.0 to Version 2.0.0.0, there are a couple of references in your config file, here are probably most of them you may have:         <compilation debug="true" defaultLanguage="c#">             <assemblies>                        <add assembly="System.Web.Mvc, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" />             </assemblies>         </compilation>           <pages masterPageFile="~/Views/Masters/CRMTemplate.master" pageParserFilterType="System.Web.Mvc.ViewTypeParserFilter, System.Web.Mvc, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" pageBaseType="System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage, System.Web.Mvc, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" userControlBaseType="System.Web.Mvc.ViewUserControl, System.Web.Mvc, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" validateRequest="False">             <controls>                 <add assembly="System.Web.Mvc, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" namespace="System.Web.Mvc" tagPrefix="mvc" />   Secondly, if you return Json objects from an ajax call via the GET method you ahve several options to fix this depending on your situation: 1. The simplest, as in my case I did this for an internal web app, you may simply do:             return Json(myObject, JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet);   2. In Mvc if you have a controller base you could wrap the Json method with:         public new JsonResult Json(object data)         {             return Json(data, "application/json", JsonRequestBehavior.AllowGet);                    }   3. The most work would be to decorate your Actions with:         [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Get)]   4. Another tnat is also a lot of work that needs to be done to every ajax call returning Json is:                             msg = $.ajax({ url: $('#ajaxGetSampleUrl').val(), dataType: 'json', type: 'POST', async: false, data: { name: theClass }, success: function(data, result) { if (!result) alert('Failure to retrieve the Sample Data.'); } }).responseText;   This should cover all the issues you may run into when upgrading. Let me kow if you run into any other ones.

    Read the article

  • Test-Drive ASP.NET MVC Review

    - by Ben Griswold
    A few years back I started dallying with test-driven development, but I never fully committed to the practice. This wasn’t because I didn’t believe in the value of TDD; it was more a matter of not completely understanding how to incorporate “test first” into my everyday development. Back in my web forms days, I could point fingers at the framework for my ignorance and laziness. After all, web forms weren’t exactly designed for testability so who could blame me for not embracing TDD in those conditions, right? But when I switched to ASP.NET MVC and quickly found myself fresh out of excuses and it became instantly clear that it was time to get my head around red-green-refactor once and for all or I would regretfully miss out on one of the biggest selling points the new framework had to offer. I have previously written about how I learned ASP.NET MVC. It was primarily hands on learning but I did read a couple of ASP.NET MVC books along the way. The books I read dedicated a chapter or two to TDD and they certainly addressed the benefits of TDD and how MVC was designed with testability in mind, but TDD was merely an afterthought compared to, well, teaching one how to code the model, view and controller. This approach made some sense, and I learned a bunch about MVC from those books, but when it came to TDD the books were just a teaser and an opportunity missed.  But then I got lucky – Jonathan McCracken contacted me and asked if I’d review his book, Test-Drive ASP.NET MVC, and it was just what I needed to get over the TDD hump. As the title suggests, Test-Drive ASP.NET MVC takes a different approach to learning MVC as it focuses on testing right from the very start. McCracken wastes no time and swiftly familiarizes us with the framework by building out a trivial Quote-O-Matic application and then dedicates the better part of his book to testing first – first by explaining TDD and then coding a full-featured Getting Organized application inspired by David Allen’s popular book, Getting Things Done. If you are a learn-by-example kind of coder (like me), you will instantly appreciate and enjoy McCracken’s style – its fast-moving, pragmatic and focused on only the most relevant information required to get you going with ASP.NET MVC and TDD. The book continues with the test-first theme but McCracken moves away from the sample application and incorporates other practical skills like persisting models with NHibernate, leveraging Inversion of Control with the IControllerFactory and building a RESTful web service. What I most appreciated about this section was McCracken’s use of and praise for open source libraries like Rhino Mocks, SQLite and StructureMap (to name just a few) and productivity tools like ReSharper, Web Platform Installer and ASP.NET SQL Server Setup Wizard.  McCracken’s emphasis on real world, pragmatic development was clearly demonstrated in every tool choice, straight-forward code block and developer tip. Whether one is already familiar with the tools/tips or not, McCracken’s thought process is easily understood and appreciated. The final section of the book walks the reader through security and deployment – everything from error handling and logging with ELMAH, to ASP.NET Health Monitoring, to using MSBuild with automated builds, to the deployment  of ASP.NET MVC to various web environments. These chapters, like those prior, offer enough information and explanation to simply help you get the job done.  Do I believe Test-Drive ASP.NET MVC will turn you into an expert MVC developer overnight?  Well, no.  I don’t think any book can make that claim.  If that were possible, I think book list prices would skyrocket!  That said, Test-Drive ASP.NET MVC provides a solid foundation and a unique (and dare I say necessary) approach to learning ASP.NET MVC.  Along the way McCracken shares loads of very practical software development tips and references numerous tools and libraries. The bottom line is it’s a great ASP.NET MVC primer – if you’re new to ASP.NET MVC it’s just what you need to get started.  Do I believe Test-Drive ASP.NET MVC will give you everything you need to start employing TDD in your everyday development?  Well, I used to think that learning TDD required a lot of practice and, if you’re lucky enough, the guidance of a mentor or coach.  I used to think that one couldn’t learn TDD from a book alone. Well, I’m still no pro, but I’m testing first now and Jonathan McCracken and his book, Test-Drive ASP.NET MVC, played a big part in making this happen.  If you are an MVC developer and a TDD newb, Test-Drive ASP.NET MVC is just the book for you.

    Read the article

  • What are some useful things you can do with Mvc Modelbinders?

    - by George Mauer
    It occurs to me that the ModelBinder mechanism in ASP MVC public interface IModelBinder { object BindModel(System.Web.Mvc.ControllerContext controllerContext, System.Web.Mvc.ModelBindingContext bindingContext); } Is insanely powerful. What are some cool uses of this mechanism that you've done/seen? I guess since the concept is similar in other frameworks there's no reason to limit it to Asp Mvc

    Read the article

  • Rendering ASP.NET MVC Views to String

    - by Rick Strahl
    It's not uncommon in my applications that I require longish text output that does not have to be rendered into the HTTP output stream. The most common scenario I have for 'template driven' non-Web text is for emails of all sorts. Logon confirmations and verifications, email confirmations for things like orders, status updates or scheduler notifications - all of which require merged text output both within and sometimes outside of Web applications. On other occasions I also need to capture the output from certain views for logging purposes. Rather than creating text output in code, it's much nicer to use the rendering mechanism that ASP.NET MVC already provides by way of it's ViewEngines - using Razor or WebForms views - to render output to a string. This is nice because it uses the same familiar rendering mechanism that I already use for my HTTP output and it also solves the problem of where to store the templates for rendering this content in nothing more than perhaps a separate view folder. The good news is that ASP.NET MVC's rendering engine is much more modular than the full ASP.NET runtime engine which was a real pain in the butt to coerce into rendering output to string. With MVC the rendering engine has been separated out from core ASP.NET runtime, so it's actually a lot easier to get View output into a string. Getting View Output from within an MVC Application If you need to generate string output from an MVC and pass some model data to it, the process to capture this output is fairly straight forward and involves only a handful of lines of code. The catch is that this particular approach requires that you have an active ControllerContext that can be passed to the view. This means that the following approach is limited to access from within Controller methods. Here's a class that wraps the process and provides both instance and static methods to handle the rendering:/// <summary> /// Class that renders MVC views to a string using the /// standard MVC View Engine to render the view. /// /// Note: This class can only be used within MVC /// applications that have an active ControllerContext. /// </summary> public class ViewRenderer { /// <summary> /// Required Controller Context /// </summary> protected ControllerContext Context { get; set; } public ViewRenderer(ControllerContext controllerContext) { Context = controllerContext; } /// <summary> /// Renders a full MVC view to a string. Will render with the full MVC /// View engine including running _ViewStart and merging into _Layout /// </summary> /// <param name="viewPath"> /// The path to the view to render. Either in same controller, shared by /// name or as fully qualified ~/ path including extension /// </param> /// <param name="model">The model to render the view with</param> /// <returns>String of the rendered view or null on error</returns> public string RenderView(string viewPath, object model) { return RenderViewToStringInternal(viewPath, model, false); } /// <summary> /// Renders a partial MVC view to string. Use this method to render /// a partial view that doesn't merge with _Layout and doesn't fire /// _ViewStart. /// </summary> /// <param name="viewPath"> /// The path to the view to render. Either in same controller, shared by /// name or as fully qualified ~/ path including extension /// </param> /// <param name="model">The model to pass to the viewRenderer</param> /// <returns>String of the rendered view or null on error</returns> public string RenderPartialView(string viewPath, object model) { return RenderViewToStringInternal(viewPath, model, true); } public static string RenderView(string viewPath, object model, ControllerContext controllerContext) { ViewRenderer renderer = new ViewRenderer(controllerContext); return renderer.RenderView(viewPath, model); } public static string RenderPartialView(string viewPath, object model, ControllerContext controllerContext) { ViewRenderer renderer = new ViewRenderer(controllerContext); return renderer.RenderPartialView(viewPath, model); } protected string RenderViewToStringInternal(string viewPath, object model, bool partial = false) { // first find the ViewEngine for this view ViewEngineResult viewEngineResult = null; if (partial) viewEngineResult = ViewEngines.Engines.FindPartialView(Context, viewPath); else viewEngineResult = ViewEngines.Engines.FindView(Context, viewPath, null); if (viewEngineResult == null) throw new FileNotFoundException(Properties.Resources.ViewCouldNotBeFound); // get the view and attach the model to view data var view = viewEngineResult.View; Context.Controller.ViewData.Model = model; string result = null; using (var sw = new StringWriter()) { var ctx = new ViewContext(Context, view, Context.Controller.ViewData, Context.Controller.TempData, sw); view.Render(ctx, sw); result = sw.ToString(); } return result; } } The key is the RenderViewToStringInternal method. The method first tries to find the view to render based on its path which can either be in the current controller's view path or the shared view path using its simple name (PasswordRecovery) or alternately by its full virtual path (~/Views/Templates/PasswordRecovery.cshtml). This code should work both for Razor and WebForms views although I've only tried it with Razor Views. Note that WebForms Views might actually be better for plain text as Razor adds all sorts of white space into its output when there are code blocks in the template. The Web Forms engine provides more accurate rendering for raw text scenarios. Once a view engine is found the view to render can be retrieved. Views in MVC render based on data that comes off the controller like the ViewData which contains the model along with the actual ViewData and ViewBag. From the View and some of the Context data a ViewContext is created which is then used to render the view with. The View picks up the Model and other data from the ViewContext internally and processes the View the same it would be processed if it were to send its output into the HTTP output stream. The difference is that we can override the ViewContext's output stream which we provide and capture into a StringWriter(). After rendering completes the result holds the output string. If an error occurs the error behavior is similar what you see with regular MVC errors - you get a full yellow screen of death including the view error information with the line of error highlighted. It's your responsibility to handle the error - or let it bubble up to your regular Controller Error filter if you have one. To use the simple class you only need a single line of code if you call the static methods. Here's an example of some Controller code that is used to send a user notification to a customer via email in one of my applications:[HttpPost] public ActionResult ContactSeller(ContactSellerViewModel model) { InitializeViewModel(model); var entryBus = new busEntry(); var entry = entryBus.LoadByDisplayId(model.EntryId); if ( string.IsNullOrEmpty(model.Email) ) entryBus.ValidationErrors.Add("Email address can't be empty.","Email"); if ( string.IsNullOrEmpty(model.Message)) entryBus.ValidationErrors.Add("Message can't be empty.","Message"); model.EntryId = entry.DisplayId; model.EntryTitle = entry.Title; if (entryBus.ValidationErrors.Count > 0) { ErrorDisplay.AddMessages(entryBus.ValidationErrors); ErrorDisplay.ShowError("Please correct the following:"); } else { string message = ViewRenderer.RenderView("~/views/template/ContactSellerEmail.cshtml",model, ControllerContext); string title = entry.Title + " (" + entry.DisplayId + ") - " + App.Configuration.ApplicationName; AppUtils.SendEmail(title, message, model.Email, entry.User.Email, false, false)) } return View(model); } Simple! The view in this case is just a plain MVC view and in this case it's a very simple plain text email message (edited for brevity here) that is created and sent off:@model ContactSellerViewModel @{ Layout = null; }re: @Model.EntryTitle @Model.ListingUrl @Model.Message ** SECURITY ADVISORY - AVOID SCAMS ** Avoid: wiring money, cross-border deals, work-at-home ** Beware: cashier checks, money orders, escrow, shipping ** More Info: @(App.Configuration.ApplicationBaseUrl)scams.html Obviously this is a very simple view (I edited out more from this page to keep it brief) -  but other template views are much more complex HTML documents or long messages that are occasionally updated and they are a perfect fit for Razor rendering. It even works with nested partial views and _layout pages. Partial Rendering Notice that I'm rendering a full View here. In the view I explicitly set the Layout=null to avoid pulling in _layout.cshtml for this view. This can also be controlled externally by calling the RenderPartial method instead: string message = ViewRenderer.RenderPartialView("~/views/template/ContactSellerEmail.cshtml",model, ControllerContext); with this line of code no layout page (or _viewstart) will be loaded, so the output generated is just what's in the view. I find myself using Partials most of the time when rendering templates, since the target of templates usually tend to be emails or other HTML fragment like output, so the RenderPartialView() method is definitely useful to me. Rendering without a ControllerContext The preceding class is great when you're need template rendering from within MVC controller actions or anywhere where you have access to the request Controller. But if you don't have a controller context handy - maybe inside a utility function that is static, a non-Web application, or an operation that runs asynchronously in ASP.NET - which makes using the above code impossible. I haven't found a way to manually create a Controller context to provide the ViewContext() what it needs from outside of the MVC infrastructure. However, there are ways to accomplish this,  but they are a bit more complex. It's possible to host the RazorEngine on your own, which side steps all of the MVC framework and HTTP and just deals with the raw rendering engine. I wrote about this process in Hosting the Razor Engine in Non-Web Applications a long while back. It's quite a process to create a custom Razor engine and runtime, but it allows for all sorts of flexibility. There's also a RazorEngine CodePlex project that does something similar. I've been meaning to check out the latter but haven't gotten around to it since I have my own code to do this. The trick to hosting the RazorEngine to have it behave properly inside of an ASP.NET application and properly cache content so templates aren't constantly rebuild and reparsed. Anyway, in the same app as above I have one scenario where no ControllerContext is available: I have a background scheduler running inside of the app that fires on timed intervals. This process could be external but because it's lightweight we decided to fire it right inside of the ASP.NET app on a separate thread. In my app the code that renders these templates does something like this:var model = new SearchNotificationViewModel() { Entries = entries, Notification = notification, User = user }; // TODO: Need logging for errors sending string razorError = null; var result = AppUtils.RenderRazorTemplate("~/views/template/SearchNotificationTemplate.cshtml", model, razorError); which references a couple of helper functions that set up my RazorFolderHostContainer class:public static string RenderRazorTemplate(string virtualPath, object model,string errorMessage = null) { var razor = AppUtils.CreateRazorHost(); var path = virtualPath.Replace("~/", "").Replace("~", "").Replace("/", "\\"); var merged = razor.RenderTemplateToString(path, model); if (merged == null) errorMessage = razor.ErrorMessage; return merged; } /// <summary> /// Creates a RazorStringHostContainer and starts it /// Call .Stop() when you're done with it. /// /// This is a static instance /// </summary> /// <param name="virtualPath"></param> /// <param name="binBasePath"></param> /// <param name="forceLoad"></param> /// <returns></returns> public static RazorFolderHostContainer CreateRazorHost(string binBasePath = null, bool forceLoad = false) { if (binBasePath == null) { if (HttpContext.Current != null) binBasePath = HttpContext.Current.Server.MapPath("~/"); else binBasePath = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.BaseDirectory; } if (_RazorHost == null || forceLoad) { if (!binBasePath.EndsWith("\\")) binBasePath += "\\"; //var razor = new RazorStringHostContainer(); var razor = new RazorFolderHostContainer(); razor.TemplatePath = binBasePath; binBasePath += "bin\\"; razor.BaseBinaryFolder = binBasePath; razor.UseAppDomain = false; razor.ReferencedAssemblies.Add(binBasePath + "ClassifiedsBusiness.dll"); razor.ReferencedAssemblies.Add(binBasePath + "ClassifiedsWeb.dll"); razor.ReferencedAssemblies.Add(binBasePath + "Westwind.Utilities.dll"); razor.ReferencedAssemblies.Add(binBasePath + "Westwind.Web.dll"); razor.ReferencedAssemblies.Add(binBasePath + "Westwind.Web.Mvc.dll"); razor.ReferencedAssemblies.Add("System.Web.dll"); razor.ReferencedNamespaces.Add("System.Web"); razor.ReferencedNamespaces.Add("ClassifiedsBusiness"); razor.ReferencedNamespaces.Add("ClassifiedsWeb"); razor.ReferencedNamespaces.Add("Westwind.Web"); razor.ReferencedNamespaces.Add("Westwind.Utilities"); _RazorHost = razor; _RazorHost.Start(); //_RazorHost.Engine.Configuration.CompileToMemory = false; } return _RazorHost; } The RazorFolderHostContainer essentially is a full runtime that mimics a folder structure like a typical Web app does including caching semantics and compiling code only if code changes on disk. It maps a folder hierarchy to views using the ~/ path syntax. The host is then configured to add assemblies and namespaces. Unfortunately the engine is not exactly like MVC's Razor - the expression expansion and code execution are the same, but some of the support methods like sections, helpers etc. are not all there so templates have to be a bit simpler. There are other folder hosts provided as well to directly execute templates from strings (using RazorStringHostContainer). The following is an example of an HTML email template @inherits RazorHosting.RazorTemplateFolderHost <ClassifiedsWeb.SearchNotificationViewModel> <html> <head> <title>Search Notifications</title> <style> body { margin: 5px;font-family: Verdana, Arial; font-size: 10pt;} h3 { color: SteelBlue; } .entry-item { border-bottom: 1px solid grey; padding: 8px; margin-bottom: 5px; } </style> </head> <body> Hello @Model.User.Name,<br /> <p>Below are your Search Results for the search phrase:</p> <h3>@Model.Notification.SearchPhrase</h3> <small>since @TimeUtils.ShortDateString(Model.Notification.LastSearch)</small> <hr /> You can see that the syntax is a little different. Instead of the familiar @model header the raw Razor  @inherits tag is used to specify the template base class (which you can extend). I took a quick look through the feature set of RazorEngine on CodePlex (now Github I guess) and the template implementation they use is closer to MVC's razor but there are other differences. In the end don't expect exact behavior like MVC templates if you use an external Razor rendering engine. This is not what I would consider an ideal solution, but it works well enough for this project. My biggest concern is the overhead of hosting a second razor engine in a Web app and the fact that here the differences in template rendering between 'real' MVC Razor views and another RazorEngine really are noticeable. You win some, you lose some It's extremely nice to see that if you have a ControllerContext handy (which probably addresses 99% of Web app scenarios) rendering a view to string using the native MVC Razor engine is pretty simple. Kudos on making that happen - as it solves a problem I see in just about every Web application I work on. But it is a bummer that a ControllerContext is required to make this simple code work. It'd be really sweet if there was a way to render views without being so closely coupled to the ASP.NET or MVC infrastructure that requires a ControllerContext. Alternately it'd be nice to have a way for an MVC based application to create a minimal ControllerContext from scratch - maybe somebody's been down that path. I tried for a few hours to come up with a way to make that work but gave up in the soup of nested contexts (MVC/Controller/View/Http). I suspect going down this path would be similar to hosting the ASP.NET runtime requiring a WorkerRequest. Brrr…. The sad part is that it seems to me that a View should really not require much 'context' of any kind to render output to string. Yes there are a few things that clearly are required like paths to the virtual and possibly the disk paths to the root of the app, but beyond that view rendering should not require much. But, no such luck. For now custom RazorHosting seems to be the only way to make Razor rendering go outside of the MVC context… Resources Full ViewRenderer.cs source code from Westwind.Web.Mvc library Hosting the Razor Engine for Non-Web Applications RazorEngine on GitHub© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in ASP.NET   ASP.NET  MVC   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • Free Video Training: ASP.NET MVC 3 Features

    - by ScottGu
    A few weeks ago I blogged about a great ASP.NET MVC 3 video training course from Pluralsight that was made available for free for 48 hours for people to watch.  The feedback from the people that had a chance to watch it was really fantastic.  We also received feedback from people who really wanted to watch it – but unfortunately weren’t able to within the 48 hour window. The good news is that we’ve worked with Pluralsight to make the course available for free again until March 18th.  You can watch any of the course modules for free, through March 18th, on the www.asp.net/mvc website here: The 6 videos in this course are a total of 3 hours and 17 minutes long, and provide a nice overview of the new features introduced with ASP.NET MVC 3 including: Razor, Unobtrusive JavaScript, Richer Validation, ViewBag, Output Caching, Global Action Filters, NuGet, Dependency Injection, and much more.  Scott Allen is the presenter, and the format, video player, and cadence of the course is really excellent. It provides a great way to quickly come up to speed with all of the new features introduced with the new ASP.NET MVC 3 release. Introductory ASP.NET MVC 3 course also coming soon The above course provides a good way for people already familiar with ASP.NET MVC to quickly learn the new features in the V3 release. Pluralsight is also working on a new introductory ASP.NET MVC 3 course series designed for developers who are brand new to ASP.NET MVC, and who want an end to end training curriculum on how to come up to speed with it.  It will cover all of the basics of ASP.NET MVC (including the new Razor view engine), how to use EF code first for data access, using JavaScript/AJAX with MVC, security scenarios with MVC, unit testing applications, deploying applications, and more. I’m excited to pre-announce that we’ll also make this new introductory series free on the www.asp.net/mvc web-site for anyone to watch. I’ll do another blog post linking to it once it is live and available. Hope this helps, Scott

    Read the article

  • Actions and Controllers managing strategy in MVC apps

    - by singleton
    Can anyone name any usefull strategy/architectural pattern for allocating actions between different controllers when using MVC pattern for developing web application? I am now developing web app using asp.net Mvc3 framework and still can't figure out how to manage actions and controllers. One approach is to create single action controller for each url, but it's not the best choice since to much controllers have to be created. Should I list all available urls that are supported by me web app, devide them into groups and create separate controller for each group or act in any different manner? It seems like I will become face to face with some kind of mess with no consistent approach in managing actions and controllers.

    Read the article

  • Modular enterprise architecture using MVC and Orchard CMS

    - by MrJD
    I'm making a large scale MVC application using Orchard. And I'm going to be separating my logic into modules. I'm also trying to heavily decouple the application for maximum extensibility and testability. I have a rudimentary understanding of IoC, Repository Pattern, Unit of Work pattern and Service Layer pattern. I've made myself a diagram. I'm wondering if it is correct and if there is anything I have missed regarding an extensible application. Note that each module is a separate project. Update So I have many UI modules that use the db module, that's why they've been split up. There are other services the UI modules will use. The UI modules have been split up because they will be made over time, independent of each other.

    Read the article

  • MVC helper functions business logic

    - by Menelaos Vergis
    I am creating some helper functions (mvc.net) for creating common controls that I need in almost every project such as alert boxes, dialogs etc. If these do not contain any business logic and it's just client side code (html, js) then it's ok. My problem arises when I need some business logic behind this helper. I want to create a 'rate my (web) application' control that will be visible every 3 days and the user may hide it for now, navigate to rate link or hide it for ever. To do this I need some sort of database access and a code that acts as business logic. Normally I would use a controller for this, with my DI and everything, but I don't know where to put this code now. This should be placed in the helper function or in a controller that responds objects instead of ActionResults?

    Read the article

  • MVC, when to separate controllers?

    - by Rodolfo
    I'm starting with MVC and have a newbie question. What would be the logic criteria to define what a controller should encompass? For example, say a website has a 'help' section. In there, there are several options like: 'about us', 'return instructions', 'contact us', 'employment opportunities'. Each would then be accessed like 'mysite.com/help/aboutus', 'mysite.com/help/returns', 'mysite.com/help/contactus', etc. My question is, should I have a 'help' controller that has 'about us', 'returns', 'contact us', 'employment' as actions with their respective view, or should each of those be a different controller-action-view set? What should be the line of reasoning to determine when to separate controllers?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 2 Released

    - by ScottGu
    I’m happy to announce that the final release of ASP.NET MVC 2 is now available for VS 2008/Visual Web Developer 2008 Express with ASP.NET 3.5.  You can download and install it from the following locations: Download ASP.NET MVC 2 using the Microsoft Web Platform Installer Download ASP.NET MVC 2 from the Download Center The final release of VS 2010 and Visual Web Developer 2010 will have ASP.NET MVC 2 built-in – so you won’t need an additional install in order to use ASP.NET MVC 2 with them.  ASP.NET MVC 2 We shipped ASP.NET MVC 1 a little less than a year ago.  Since then, almost 1 million developers have downloaded and used the final release, and its popularity has steadily grown month over month. ASP.NET MVC 2 is the next significant update of ASP.NET MVC. It is a compatible update to ASP.NET MVC 1 – so all the knowledge, skills, code, and extensions you already have with ASP.NET MVC continue to work and apply going forward. Like the first release, we are also shipping the source code for ASP.NET MVC 2 under an OSI-compliant open-source license. ASP.NET MVC 2 can be installed side-by-side with ASP.NET MVC 1 (meaning you can have some apps built with V1 and others built with V2 on the same machine).  We have instructions on how to update your existing ASP.NET MVC 1 apps to use ASP.NET MVC 2 using VS 2008 here.  Note that VS 2010 has an automated upgrade wizard that can automatically migrate your existing ASP.NET MVC 1 applications to ASP.NET MVC 2 for you. ASP.NET MVC 2 Features ASP.NET MVC 2 adds a bunch of new capabilities and features.  I’ve started a blog series about some of the new features, and will be covering them in more depth in the weeks ahead.  Some of the new features and capabilities include: New Strongly Typed HTML Helpers Enhanced Model Validation support across both server and client Auto-Scaffold UI Helpers with Template Customization Support for splitting up large applications into “Areas” Asynchronous Controllers support that enables long running tasks in parallel Support for rendering sub-sections of a page/site using Html.RenderAction Lots of new helper functions, utilities, and API enhancements Improved Visual Studio tooling support You can learn more about these features in the “What’s New in ASP.NET MVC 2” document on the www.asp.net/mvc web-site.  We are going to be posting a lot of new tutorials and videos shortly on www.asp.net/mvc that cover all the features in ASP.NET MVC 2 release.  We will also post an updated end-to-end tutorial built entirely with ASP.NET MVC 2 (much like the NerdDinner tutorial that I wrote that covers ASP.NET MVC 1).  Summary The ASP.NET MVC team delivered regular V2 preview releases over the last year to get feedback on the feature set.  I’d like to say a big thank you to everyone who tried out the previews and sent us suggestions/feedback/bug reports.  We hope you like the final release! Scott

    Read the article

  • Trying to update an MVC 1.0 project to MVC 2.0

    - by Cptcecil
    I'm trying to update my project to MVC 2.0 from MVC 1.0. I've removed the references for System.Web.MVC to the newer versions. I'm getting an exception from the HTTPContext which reads "CurrentNotification = 'HttpContext.Current.CurrentNotification' threw an exception of type 'System.PlatformNotSupportedException'". What other binaries do I need to update a reference to, to get my project to work again?

    Read the article

  • Behind ASP.NET MVC Mock Objects

    - by imran_ku07
       Introduction:           I think this sentence now become very familiar to ASP.NET MVC developers that "ASP.NET MVC is designed with testability in mind". But what ASP.NET MVC team did for making applications build with ASP.NET MVC become easily testable? Understanding this is also very important because it gives you some help when designing custom classes. So in this article i will discuss some abstract classes provided by ASP.NET MVC team for the various ASP.NET intrinsic objects, including HttpContext, HttpRequest, and HttpResponse for making these objects as testable. I will also discuss that why it is hard and difficult to test ASP.NET Web Forms.      Description:           Starting from Classic ASP to ASP.NET MVC, ASP.NET Intrinsic objects is extensively used in all form of web application. They provide information about Request, Response, Server, Application and so on. But ASP.NET MVC uses these intrinsic objects in some abstract manner. The reason for this abstraction is to make your application testable. So let see the abstraction.           As we know that ASP.NET MVC uses the same runtime engine as ASP.NET Web Form uses, therefore the first receiver of the request after IIS and aspnet_filter.dll is aspnet_isapi.dll. This will start the application domain. With the application domain up and running, ASP.NET does some initialization and after some initialization it will call Application_Start if it is defined. Then the normal HTTP pipeline event handlers will be executed including both HTTP Modules and global.asax event handlers. One of the HTTP Module is registered by ASP.NET MVC is UrlRoutingModule. The purpose of this module is to match a route defined in global.asax. Every matched route must have IRouteHandler. In default case this is MvcRouteHandler which is responsible for determining the HTTP Handler which returns MvcHandler (which is derived from IHttpHandler). In simple words, Route has MvcRouteHandler which returns MvcHandler which is the IHttpHandler of current request. In between HTTP pipeline events the handler of ASP.NET MVC, MvcHandler.ProcessRequest will be executed and shown as given below,          void IHttpHandler.ProcessRequest(HttpContext context)          {                    this.ProcessRequest(context);          }          protected virtual void ProcessRequest(HttpContext context)          {                    // HttpContextWrapper inherits from HttpContextBase                    HttpContextBase ctxBase = new HttpContextWrapper(context);                    this.ProcessRequest(ctxBase);          }          protected internal virtual void ProcessRequest(HttpContextBase ctxBase)          {                    . . .          }             HttpContextBase is the base class. HttpContextWrapper inherits from HttpContextBase, which is the parent class that include information about a single HTTP request. This is what ASP.NET MVC team did, just wrap old instrinsic HttpContext into HttpContextWrapper object and provide opportunity for other framework to provide their own implementation of HttpContextBase. For example           public class MockHttpContext : HttpContextBase          {                    . . .          }                     As you can see, it is very easy to create your own HttpContext. That's what did the third party mock frameworks like TypeMock, Moq, RhinoMocks, or NMock2 to provide their own implementation of ASP.NET instrinsic objects classes.           The key point to note here is the types of ASP.NET instrinsic objects. In ASP.NET Web Form and ASP.NET MVC. For example in ASP.NET Web Form the type of Request object is HttpRequest (which is sealed) and in ASP.NET MVC the type of Request object is HttpRequestBase. This is one of the reason that makes test in ASP.NET WebForm is difficult. because their is no base class and the HttpRequest class is sealed, therefore it cannot act as a base class to others. On the other side ASP.NET MVC always uses a base class to give a chance to third parties and unit test frameworks to create thier own implementation ASP.NET instrinsic object.           Therefore we can say that in ASP.NET MVC, instrinsic objects are of type base classes (for example HttpContextBase) .Actually these base classes had it's own implementation of same interface as the intrinsic objects it abstracts. It includes only virtual members which simply throws an exception. ASP.NET MVC also provides the corresponding wrapper classes (for example, HttpRequestWrapper) which provides a concrete implementation of the base classes in the form of ASP.NET intrinsic object. Other wrapper classes may be defined by third parties in the form of a mock object for testing purpose.           So we can say that a Request object in ASP.NET MVC may be HttpRequestWrapper or may be MockRequestWrapper(assuming that MockRequestWrapper class is used for testing purpose). Here is list of ASP.NET instrinsic and their implementation in ASP.NET MVC in the form of base and wrapper classes. Base Class Wrapper Class ASP.NET Intrinsic Object Description HttpApplicationStateBase HttpApplicationStateWrapper Application HttpApplicationStateBase abstracts the intrinsic Application object HttpBrowserCapabilitiesBase HttpBrowserCapabilitiesWrapper HttpBrowserCapabilities HttpBrowserCapabilitiesBase abstracts the HttpBrowserCapabilities class HttpCachePolicyBase HttpCachePolicyWrapper HttpCachePolicy HttpCachePolicyBase abstracts the HttpCachePolicy class HttpContextBase HttpContextWrapper HttpContext HttpContextBase abstracts the intrinsic HttpContext object HttpFileCollectionBase HttpFileCollectionWrapper HttpFileCollection HttpFileCollectionBase abstracts the HttpFileCollection class HttpPostedFileBase HttpPostedFileWrapper HttpPostedFile HttpPostedFileBase abstracts the HttpPostedFile class HttpRequestBase HttpRequestWrapper Request HttpRequestBase abstracts the intrinsic Request object HttpResponseBase HttpResponseWrapper Response HttpResponseBase abstracts the intrinsic Response object HttpServerUtilityBase HttpServerUtilityWrapper Server HttpServerUtilityBase abstracts the intrinsic Server object HttpSessionStateBase HttpSessionStateWrapper Session HttpSessionStateBase abstracts the intrinsic Session object HttpStaticObjectsCollectionBase HttpStaticObjectsCollectionWrapper HttpStaticObjectsCollection HttpStaticObjectsCollectionBase abstracts the HttpStaticObjectsCollection class      Summary:           ASP.NET MVC provides a set of abstract classes for ASP.NET instrinsic objects in the form of base classes, allowing someone to create their own implementation. In addition, ASP.NET MVC also provide set of concrete classes in the form of wrapper classes. This design really makes application easier to test and even application may replace concrete implementation with thier own implementation, which makes ASP.NET MVC very flexable.

    Read the article

  • Routing Issue in ASP.NET MVC 3 RC 2

    - by imran_ku07
         Introduction:             Two weeks ago, ASP.NET MVC team shipped the ASP.NET MVC 3 RC 2 release. This release includes some new features and some performance optimization. This release also fixes most of the bugs but still some minor issues are present in this release. Some of these issues are already discussed by Scott Guthrie at Update on ASP.NET MVC 3 RC2 (and a workaround for a bug in it). In addition to these issues, I have found another issue in this release regarding routing. In this article, I will show you the issue regarding routing and a simple workaround for this issue.       Description:             The easiest way to understand an issue is to reproduce it in the application. So create a MVC 2 application and a MVC 3 RC 2 application. Then in both applications, just open global.asax file and update the default route as below,     routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}"); routes.MapRoute( "Default", // Route name "{controller}/{action}/{id1}/{id2}", // URL with parameters new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id1 = UrlParameter.Optional, id2 = UrlParameter.Optional } // Parameter defaults );              Then just open Index View and add the following lines,    <%@ Page Language="C#" MasterPageFile="~/Views/Shared/Site.Master" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage" %> <asp:Content ID="Content1" ContentPlaceHolderID="TitleContent" runat="server"> Home Page </asp:Content> <asp:Content ID="Content2" ContentPlaceHolderID="MainContent" runat="server"> <% Html.RenderAction("About"); %> </asp:Content>             The above view will issue a child request to About action method. Now run both applications. ASP.NET MVC 2 application will run just fine. But ASP.NET MVC 3 RC 2 application will throw an exception as shown below,                  You may think that this is a routing issue but this is not the case here as both ASP.NET MVC 2 and ASP.NET MVC  3 RC 2 applications(created above) are built with .NET Framework 4.0 and both will use the same routing defined in System.Web. Something is wrong in ASP.NET MVC 3 RC 2. So after digging into ASP.NET MVC source code, I have found that the UrlParameter class in ASP.NET MVC 3 RC 2 overrides the ToString method which simply return an empty string.     public sealed class UrlParameter { public static readonly UrlParameter Optional = new UrlParameter(); private UrlParameter() { } public override string ToString() { return string.Empty; } }             In MVC 2 the ToString method was not overridden. So to quickly fix the above problem just replace UrlParameter.Optional default value with a different value other than null or empty(for example, a single white space) or replace UrlParameter.Optional default value with a new class object containing the same code as UrlParameter class have except the ToString method is not overridden (or with a overridden ToString method that return a string value other than null or empty). But by doing this you will loose the benefit of ASP.NET MVC 2 Optional URL Parameters. There may be many different ways to fix the above problem and not loose the benefit of optional parameters. Here I will create a new class MyUrlParameter with the same code as UrlParameter class have except the ToString method is not overridden. Then I will create a base controller class which contains a constructor to remove all MyUrlParameter route data parameters, same like ASP.NET MVC doing with UrlParameter route data parameters early in the request.     public class BaseController : Controller { public BaseController() { if (System.Web.HttpContext.Current.CurrentHandler is MvcHandler) { RouteValueDictionary rvd = ((MvcHandler)System.Web.HttpContext.Current.CurrentHandler).RequestContext.RouteData.Values; string[] matchingKeys = (from entry in rvd where entry.Value == MyUrlParameter.Optional select entry.Key).ToArray(); foreach (string key in matchingKeys) { rvd.Remove(key); } } } } public class HomeController : BaseController { public ActionResult Index(string id1) { ViewBag.Message = "Welcome to ASP.NET MVC!"; return View(); } public ActionResult About() { return Content("Child Request Contents"); } }     public sealed class MyUrlParameter { public static readonly MyUrlParameter Optional = new MyUrlParameter(); private MyUrlParameter() { } }     routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}"); routes.MapRoute( "Default", // Route name "{controller}/{action}/{id1}/{id2}", // URL with parameters new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id1 = MyUrlParameter.Optional, id2 = MyUrlParameter.Optional } // Parameter defaults );             MyUrlParameter class is a copy of UrlParameter class except that MyUrlParameter class not overrides the ToString method. Note that the default route is modified to use MyUrlParameter.Optional instead of UrlParameter.Optional. Also note that BaseController class constructor is removing MyUrlParameter parameters from the current request route data so that the model binder will not bind these parameters with action method parameters. Now just run the ASP.NET MVC 3 RC 2 application again, you will find that it runs just fine.             In case if you are curious to know that why ASP.NET MVC 3 RC 2 application throws an exception if UrlParameter class contains a ToString method which returns an empty string, then you need to know something about a feature of routing for url generation. During url generation, routing will call the ParsedRoute.Bind method internally. This method includes a logic to match the route and build the url. During building the url, ParsedRoute.Bind method will call the ToString method of the route values(in our case this will call the UrlParameter.ToString method) and then append the returned value into url. This method includes a logic after appending the returned value into url that if two continuous returned values are empty then don't match the current route otherwise an incorrect url will be generated. Here is the snippet from ParsedRoute.Bind method which will prove this statement.       if ((builder2.Length > 0) && (builder2[builder2.Length - 1] == '/')) { return null; } builder2.Append("/"); ........................................................... ........................................................... ........................................................... ........................................................... if (RoutePartsEqual(obj3, obj4)) { builder2.Append(UrlEncode(Convert.ToString(obj3, CultureInfo.InvariantCulture))); continue; }             In the above example, both id1 and id2 parameters default values are set to UrlParameter object and UrlParameter class include a ToString method that returns an empty string. That's why this route will not matched.            Summary:             In this article I showed you the issue regarding routing and also showed you how to workaround this problem. I explained this issue with an example by creating a ASP.NET MVC 2 and a ASP.NET MVC 3 RC 2 application. Finally I also explained the reason for this issue. Hopefully you will enjoy this article too.   SyntaxHighlighter.all()

    Read the article

  • Globally Handling Request Validation In ASP.NET MVC

    - by imran_ku07
       Introduction:           Cross Site Scripting(XSS) and Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) attacks are one of dangerous attacks on web.  They are among the most famous security issues affecting web applications. OWASP regards XSS is the number one security issue on the Web. Both ASP.NET Web Forms and ASP.NET MVC paid very much attention to make applications build with ASP.NET as secure as possible. So by default they will throw an exception 'A potentially dangerous XXX value was detected from the client', when they see, < followed by an exclamation(like <!) or < followed by the letters a through z(like <s) or & followed by a pound sign(like &#123) as a part of querystring, posted form and cookie collection. This is good for lot of applications. But this is not always the case. Many applications need to allow users to enter html tags, for example applications which uses  Rich Text Editor. You can allow user to enter these tags by just setting validateRequest="false" in your Web.config application configuration file inside <pages> element if you are using Web Form. This will globally disable request validation. But in ASP.NET MVC request handling is different than ASP.NET Web Form. Therefore for disabling request validation globally in ASP.NET MVC you have to put ValidateInputAttribute in your every controller. This become pain full for you if you have hundred of controllers. Therefore in this article i will present a very simple way to handle request validation globally through web.config.   Description:           Before starting how to do this it is worth to see why validateRequest in Page directive and web.config not work in ASP.NET MVC. Actually request handling in ASP.NET Web Form and ASP.NET MVC is different. In Web Form mostly the HttpHandler is the page handler which checks the posted form, query string and cookie collection during the Page ProcessRequest method, while in MVC request validation occur when ActionInvoker calling the action. Just see the stack trace of both framework.   ASP.NET MVC Stack Trace:     System.Web.HttpRequest.ValidateString(String s, String valueName, String collectionName) +8723114   System.Web.HttpRequest.ValidateNameValueCollection(NameValueCollection nvc, String collectionName) +111   System.Web.HttpRequest.get_Form() +129   System.Web.HttpRequestWrapper.get_Form() +11   System.Web.Mvc.ValueProviderDictionary.PopulateDictionary() +145   System.Web.Mvc.ValueProviderDictionary..ctor(ControllerContext controllerContext) +74   System.Web.Mvc.ControllerBase.get_ValueProvider() +31   System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.GetParameterValue(ControllerContext controllerContext, ParameterDescriptor parameterDescriptor) +53   System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.GetParameterValues(ControllerContext controllerContext, ActionDescriptor actionDescriptor) +109   System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeAction(ControllerContext controllerContext, String actionName) +399   System.Web.Mvc.Controller.ExecuteCore() +126   System.Web.Mvc.ControllerBase.Execute(RequestContext requestContext) +27   ASP.NET Web Form Stack Trace:    System.Web.HttpRequest.ValidateString(String s, String valueName, String collectionName) +3213202   System.Web.HttpRequest.ValidateNameValueCollection(NameValueCollection nvc, String collectionName) +108   System.Web.HttpRequest.get_QueryString() +119   System.Web.UI.Page.GetCollectionBasedOnMethod(Boolean dontReturnNull) +2022776   System.Web.UI.Page.DeterminePostBackMode() +60   System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequestMain(Boolean includeStagesBeforeAsyncPoint, Boolean includeStagesAfterAsyncPoint) +6953   System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequest(Boolean includeStagesBeforeAsyncPoint, Boolean includeStagesAfterAsyncPoint) +154   System.Web.UI.Page.ProcessRequest() +86                        Since the first responder of request in ASP.NET MVC is the controller action therefore it will check the posted values during calling the action. That's why web.config's requestValidate not work in ASP.NET MVC.            So let's see how to handle this globally in ASP.NET MVC. First of all you need to add an appSettings in web.config. <appSettings>    <add key="validateRequest" value="true"/>  </appSettings>              I am using the same key used in disable request validation in Web Form. Next just create a new ControllerFactory by derving the class from DefaultControllerFactory.     public class MyAppControllerFactory : DefaultControllerFactory    {        protected override IController GetControllerInstance(Type controllerType)        {            var controller = base.GetControllerInstance(controllerType);            string validateRequest=System.Configuration.ConfigurationManager.AppSettings["validateRequest"];            bool b;            if (validateRequest != null && bool.TryParse(validateRequest,out b))                ((ControllerBase)controller).ValidateRequest = bool.Parse(validateRequest);            return controller;        }    }                         Next just register your controller factory in global.asax.        protected void Application_Start()        {            //............................................................................................            ControllerBuilder.Current.SetControllerFactory(new MyAppControllerFactory());        }              This will prevent the above exception to occur in the context of ASP.NET MVC. But if you are using the Default WebFormViewEngine then you need also to set validateRequest="false" in your web.config file inside <pages> element            Now when you run your application you see the effect of validateRequest appsetting. One thing also note that the ValidateInputAttribute placed inside action or controller will always override this setting.    Summary:          Request validation is great security feature in ASP.NET but some times there is a need to disable this entirely. So in this article i just showed you how to disable this globally in ASP.NET MVC. I also explained the difference between request validation in Web Form and ASP.NET MVC. Hopefully you will enjoy this.

    Read the article

  • Support for nested model and class validation with ASP.NET MVC 2.0

    - by Diep-Vriezer
    I'm trying to validate a model containing other objects with validation rules using the System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations attributes was hoping the default MVC implementation would suffice: var obj = js.Deserialize(json, objectInfo.ObjectType); if(!TryValidateModel(obj)) { // Handle failed model validation. } The object is composed of primitive types but also contains other classes which also use DataAnnotications. Like so: public class Entry { [Required] public Person Subscriber { get; set; } [Required] public String Company { get; set; } } public class Person { public String FirstName { get; set;} [Required] public String Surname { get; set; } } The problem is that the ASP.NET MVC validation only goes down 1 level and only evaluates the properties of the top level class, as can be read on digitallycreated.net/Blog/54/deep-inside-asp.net-mvc-2-model-metadata-and-validation. Does anyone know an elegant solution to this? I've tried xVal, but they seem to use a non-recursive pattern (http://blog.stevensanderson.com/2009/01/10/xval-a-validation-framework-for-aspnet-mvc/). Someone must have run into this problem before right? Nesting objects in your model doesn't seem so weird if you're designing a web service.

    Read the article

  • May 20th Links: ASP.NET MVC, ASP.NET, .NET 4, VS 2010, Silverlight

    - by ScottGu
    Here is the latest in my link-listing series.  Also check out my VS 2010 and .NET 4 series and ASP.NET MVC 2 series for other on-going blog series I’m working on. [In addition to blogging, I am also now using Twitter for quick updates and to share links. Follow me at: twitter.com/scottgu] ASP.NET MVC How to Localize an ASP.NET MVC Application: Michael Ceranski has a good blog post that describes how to localize ASP.NET MVC 2 applications. ASP.NET MVC with jTemplates Part 1 and Part 2: Steve Gentile has a nice two-part set of blog posts that demonstrate how to use the jTemplate and DataTable jQuery libraries to implement client-side data binding with ASP.NET MVC. CascadingDropDown jQuery Plugin for ASP.NET MVC: Raj Kaimal has a nice blog post that demonstrates how to implement a dynamically constructed cascading dropdownlist on the client using jQuery and ASP.NET MVC. How to Configure VS 2010 Code Coverage for ASP.NET MVC Unit Tests: Visual Studio enables you to calculate the “code coverage” of your unit tests.  This measures the percentage of code within your application that is exercised by your tests – and can give you a sense of how much test coverage you have.  Gunnar Peipman demonstrates how to configure this for ASP.NET MVC projects. Shrinkr URL Shortening Service Sample: A nice open source application and code sample built by Kazi Manzur that demonstrates how to implement a URL Shortening Services (like bit.ly) using ASP.NET MVC 2 and EF4.  More details here. Creating RSS Feeds in ASP.NET MVC: Damien Guard has a nice post that describes a cool new “FeedResult” class he created that makes it easy to publish and expose RSS feeds from within ASP.NET MVC sites. NoSQL with MongoDB, NoRM and ASP.NET MVC Part 1 and Part 2: Nice two-part blog series by Shiju Varghese on how to use MongoDB (a document database) with ASP.NET MVC.  If you are interested in document databases also make sure to check out the Raven DB project from Ayende. Using the FCKEditor with ASP.NET MVC: Quick blog post that describes how to use FCKEditor – an open source HTML Text Editor – with ASP.NET MVC. ASP.NET Replace Html.Encode Calls with the New HTML Encoding Syntax: Phil Haack has a good blog post that describes a useful way to quickly update your ASP.NET pages and ASP.NET MVC views to use the new <%: %> encoding syntax in ASP.NET 4.  I blogged about the new <%: %> syntax – it provides an easy and concise way to HTML encode content. Integrating Twitter into an ASP.NET Website using OAuth: Scott Mitchell has a nice article that describes how to take advantage of Twiter within an ASP.NET Website using the OAuth protocol – which is a simple, secure protocol for granting API access. Creating an ASP.NET report using VS 2010 Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3: Raj Kaimal has a nice three part set of blog posts that detail how to use SQL Server Reporting Services, ASP.NET 4 and VS 2010 to create a dynamic reporting solution. Three Hidden Extensibility Gems in ASP.NET 4: Phil Haack blogs about three obscure but useful extensibility points enabled with ASP.NET 4. .NET 4 Entity Framework 4 Video Series: Julie Lerman has a nice, free, 7-part video series on MSDN that walks through how to use the new EF4 capabilities with VS 2010 and .NET 4.  I’ll be covering EF4 in a blog series that I’m going to start shortly as well. Getting Lazy with System.Lazy: System.Lazy and System.Lazy<T> are new features in .NET 4 that provide a way to create objects that may need to perform time consuming operations and defer the execution of the operation until it is needed.  Derik Whittaker has a nice write-up that describes how to use it. LINQ to Twitter: Nifty open source library on Codeplex that enables you to use LINQ syntax to query Twitter. Visual Studio 2010 Using Intellitrace in VS 2010: Chris Koenig has a nice 10 minute video that demonstrates how to use the new Intellitrace features of VS 2010 to enable DVR playback of your debug sessions. Make the VS 2010 IDE Colors look like VS 2008: Scott Hanselman has a nice blog post that covers the Visual Studio Color Theme Editor extension – which allows you to customize the VS 2010 IDE however you want. How to understand your code using Dependency Graphs, Sequence Diagrams, and the Architecture Explorer: Jennifer Marsman has a nice blog post describes how to take advantage of some of the new architecture features within VS 2010 to quickly analyze applications and legacy code-bases. How to maintain control of your code using Layer Diagrams: Another great blog post by Jennifer Marsman that demonstrates how to setup a “layer diagram” within VS 2010 to enforce clean layering within your applications.  This enables you to enforce a compiler error if someone inadvertently violates a layer design rule. Collapse Selection in Solution Explorer Extension: Useful VS 2010 extension that enables you to quickly collapse “child nodes” within the Visual Studio Solution Explorer.  If you have deeply nested project structures this extension is useful. Silverlight and Windows Phone 7 Building a Simple Windows Phone 7 Application: A nice tutorial blog post that demonstrates how to take advantage of Expression Blend to create an animated Windows Phone 7 application. If you haven’t checked out my Windows Phone 7 Twitter Tutorial I also recommend reading that. Hope this helps, Scott P.S. If you haven’t already, check out this month’s "Find a Hoster” page on the www.asp.net website to learn about great (and very inexpensive) ASP.NET hosting offers.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 3 Hosting :: ASP.NET MVC 3 First Look

    - by mbridge
    MVC 3 View Enhancements MVC 3 introduces two improvements to the MVC view engine: - Ability to select the view engine to use. MVC 3 allows you to select from any of your  installed view engines from Visual Studio by selecting Add > View (including the newly introduced ASP.NET “Razor” engine”): - Support for the next ASP.NET “Razor” syntax. The newly previewed Razor syntax is a concise lightweight syntax. MVC 3 Control Enhancements - Global Filters: ASP.NET MVC 3  allows you to specify that a filter which applies globally to all Controllers within an app by adding it to the GlobalFilters collection.  The RegisterGlobalFilters() method is now included in the default Global.asax class template and so provides a convenient place to do this since is will then be called by the Application_Start() method: void RegisterGlobalFilters(GlobalFilterCollection filters) { filters.Add(new HandleLoggingAttribute()); filters.Add(new HandleErrorAttribute()); } void Application_Start() { RegisterGlobalFilters (GlobalFilters.Filters); } - Dynamic ViewModel Property : MVC 3 augments the ViewData API with a new “ViewModel” property on Controller which is of type “dynamic” – and therefore enables you to use the new dynamic language support in C# and VB pass ViewData items using a cleaner syntax than the current dictionary API. Public ActionResult Index() { ViewModel.Message = "Hello World"; return View(); } - New ActionResult Types : MVC 3 includes three new ActionResult types and helper methods: 1. HttpNotFoundResult – indicates that a resource which was requested by the current URL was not found. HttpNotFoundResult will return a 404 HTTP status code to the calling client. 2. PermanentRedirects – The HttpRedirectResult class contains a new Boolean “Permanent” property which is used to indicate that a permanent redirect should be done. Permanent redirects use a HTTP 301 status code.  The Controller class  includes three new methods for performing these permanent redirects: RedirectPermanent(), RedirectToRoutePermanent(), andRedirectToActionPermanent(). All  of these methods will return an instance of the HttpRedirectResult object with the Permanent property set to true. 3. HttpStatusCodeResult – used for setting an explicit response status code and its associated description. MVC 3 AJAX and JavaScript Enhancements MVC 3 ships with built-in JSON binding support which enables action methods to receive JSON-encoded data and then model-bind it to action method parameters. For example a jQuery client-side JavaScript could define a “save” event handler which will be invoked when the save button is clicked on the client. The code in the event handler then constructs a client-side JavaScript “product” object with 3 fields with their values retrieved from HTML input elements. Finally, it uses jQuery’s .ajax() method to POST a JSON based request which contains the product to a /theStore/UpdateProduct URL on the server: $('#save').click(function () { var product = { ProdName: $('#Name').val() Price: $('#Price').val(), } $.ajax({ url: '/theStore/UpdateProduct', type: "POST"; data: JSON.stringify(widget), datatype: "json", contentType: "application/json; charset=utf-8", success: function () { $('#message').html('Saved').fadeIn(), }, error: function () { $('#message').html('Error').fadeIn(), } }); return false; }); MVC will allow you to implement the /theStore/UpdateProduct URL on the server by using an action method as below. The UpdateProduct() action method will accept a strongly-typed Product object for a parameter. MVC 3 can now automatically bind an incoming JSON post value to the .NET Product type on the server without having to write any custom binding. [HttpPost] public ActionResult UpdateProduct(Product product) { // save logic here return null } MVC 3 Model Validation Enhancements MVC 3 builds on the MVC 2 model validation improvements by adding   support for several of the new validation features within the System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations namespace in .NET 4.0: - Support for the new DataAnnotations metadata attributes like DisplayAttribute. - Support for the improvements made to the ValidationAttribute class which now supports a new IsValid overload that provides more info on  the current validation context, like what object is being validated. - Support for the new IValidatableObject interface which enables you to perform model-level validation and also provide validation error messages which are specific to the state of the overall model. MVC 3 Dependency Injection Enhancements MVC 3 includes better support for applying Dependency Injection (DI) and also integrating with Dependency Injection/IOC containers. Currently MVC 3 Preview 1 has support for DI in the below places: - Controllers (registering & injecting controller factories and injecting controllers) - Views (registering & injecting view engines, also for injecting dependencies into view pages) - Action Filters (locating and  injecting filters) And this is another important blog about Microsoft .NET and technology: - Windows 2008 Blog - SharePoint 2010 Blog - .NET 4 Blog And you can visit here if you're looking for ASP.NET MVC 3 hosting

    Read the article

  • Beware: Upgrade to ASP.NET MVC 2.0 with care if you use AntiForgeryToken

    - by James Crowley
    If you're thinking of upgrading to MVC 2.0, and you take advantage of the AntiForgeryToken support then be careful - you can easily kick out all active visitors after the upgrade until they restart their browser. Why's this?For the anti forgery validation to take place, ASP.NET MVC uses a session cookie called "__RequestVerificationToken_Lw__". This gets checked for and de-serialized on any page where there is an AntiForgeryToken() call. However, the format of this validation cookie has apparently changed between MVC 1.0 and MVC 2.0. What this means is that when you make to switch on your production server to MVC 2.0, suddenly all your visitors session cookies are invalid, resulting in calls to AntiForgeryToken() throwing exceptions (even on a standard GET request) when de-serializing it: [InvalidCastException: Unable to cast object of type 'System.Web.UI.Triplet' to type 'System.Object[]'.]   System.Web.Mvc.AntiForgeryDataSerializer.Deserialize(String serializedToken) +104[HttpAntiForgeryException (0x80004005): A required anti-forgery token was not supplied or was invalid.]   System.Web.Mvc.AntiForgeryDataSerializer.Deserialize(String serializedToken) +368   System.Web.Mvc.HtmlHelper.GetAntiForgeryTokenAndSetCookie(String salt, String domain, String path) +209   System.Web.Mvc.HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken(String salt, String domain, String path) +16   System.Web.Mvc.HtmlHelper.AntiForgeryToken() +10  <snip> So you've just kicked all your active users out of your site with exceptions until they think to restart their browser (to clear the session cookies). The only work around for now is to either write some code that wipes this cookie - or disable use of AntiForgeryToken() in your MVC 2.0 site until you're confident all session cookies will have expired. That in itself isn't very straightforward, given how frequently people tend to hibernate/standby their machines - the session cookie will only clear once the browser has been shut down and re-opened. Hope this helps someone out there!

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 3 Hosting :: Rolling with Razor in MVC v3 Preview

    - by mbridge
    Razor is an alternate view engine for asp.net MVC.  It was introduced in the “WebMatrix” tool and has now been released as part of the asp.net MVC 3 preview 1.  Basically, Razor allows us to replace the clunky <% %> syntax with a much cleaner coding model, which integrates very nicely with HTML.  Additionally, it provides some really nice features for master page type scenarios and you don’t lose access to any of the features you are currently familiar with, such as HTML helper methods. First, download and install the ASP.NET MVC Preview 1.  You can find this at http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=cb42f741-8fb1-4f43-a5fa-812096f8d1e8&displaylang=en. Now, follow these steps to create your first asp.net mvc project using Razor: 1. Open Visual Studio 2010 2. Create a new project.  Select File->New->Project (Shift Control N) 3. You will see the list of project types which should look similar to what’s shown:   4. Select “ASP.NET MVC 3 Web Application (Razor).”  Set the application name to RazorTest and the path to c:projectsRazorTest for this tutorial. If you select accidently select ASPX, you will end up with the standard asp.net view engine and template, which isn’t what you want. 5. For this tutorial, and ONLY for this tutorial, select “No, do not create a unit test project.”  In general, you should create and use a unit test project.  Code without unit tests is kind of like diet ice cream.  It just isn’t very good. Now, once we have this done, our brand new project will be created.    In all likelihood, Visual Studio will leave you looking at the “HomeController.cs” class, as shown below: Immediately, you should notice one difference.  The Index action used to look like: public ActionResult Index () { ViewData[“Message”] = “Welcome to ASP.Net MVC!”; Return View(); } While this will still compile and run just fine, ASP.Net MVC 3 has a much nicer way of doing this: public ActionResult Index() { ViewModel.Message = “Welcome to ASP.Net MVC!”; Return View(); } Instead of using ViewData we are using the new ViewModel object, which uses the new dynamic data typing of .Net 4.0 to allow us to express ourselves much more cleanly.  This isn’t a tutorial on ALL of MVC 3, but the ViewModel concept is one we will need as we dig into Razor. What comes in the box? When we create a project using the ASP.Net MVC 3 Template with Razor, we get a standard project setup, just like we did in ASP.NET MVC 2.0 but with some differences.  Instead of seeing “.aspx” view files and “.ascx” files, we see files with the “.cshtml” which is the default razor extension.  Before we discuss the details of a razor file, one thing to keep in mind is that since this is an extremely early preview, intellisense is not currently enabled with the razor view engine.  This is promised as an updated before the final release.  Just like with the aspx view engine, the convention of the folder name for a set of views matching the controller name without the word “Controller” still stands.  Similarly, each action in the controller will usually have a corresponding view file in the appropriate view directory.  Remember, in asp.net MVC, convention over configuration is key to successful development! The initial template organizes views in the following folders, located in the project under Views: - Account – The default account management views used by the Account controller.  Each file represents a distinct view. - Home – Views corresponding to the appropriate actions within the home controller. - Shared – This contains common view objects used by multiple views.  Within here, master pages are stored, as well as partial page views (user controls).  By convention, these partial views are named “_XXXPartial.cshtml” where XXX is the appropriate name, such as _LogonPartial.cshtml.  Additionally, display templates are stored under here. With this in mind, let us take a look at the index.cshtml file under the home view directory.  When you open up index.cshtml you should see 1:   @inherits System.Web.Mvc.WebViewPage 2:  @{ 3:          View.Title = "Home Page"; 4:       LayoutPage = "~/Views/Shared/_Layout.cshtml"; 5:   } 6:  <h2>@View.Message</h2> 7:  <p> 8:     To learn more about ASP.NET MVC visit <a href="http://asp.net/mvc" title="ASP.NET MVC     9:    Website">http://asp.net/mvc</a>. 10:  </p> So looking through this, we observe the following facts: Line 1 imports the base page that all views (using Razor) are based on, which is System.Web.Mvc.WebViewPage.  Note that this is different than System.Web.MVC.ViewPage which is used by asp.net MVC 2.0 Also note that instead of the <% %> syntax, we use the very simple ‘@’ sign.  The View Engine contains enough context sensitive logic that it can even distinguish between @ in code and @ in an email.  It’s a very clean markup.  Line 2 introduces the idea of a code block in razor.  A code block is a scoping mechanism just like it is in a normal C# class.  It is designated by @{… }  and any C# code can be placed in between.  Note that this is all server side code just like it is when using the aspx engine and <% %>.  Line 3 allows us to set the page title in the client page’s file.  This is a new feature which I’ll talk more about when we get to master pages, but it is another of the nice things razor brings to asp.net mvc development. Line 4 is where we specify our “master” page, but as you can see, you can place it almost anywhere you want, because you tell it where it is located.  A Layout Page is similar to a master page, but it gains a bit when it comes to flexibility.  Again, we’ll come back to this in a later installment.  Line 6 and beyond is where we display the contents of our view.  No more using <%: %> intermixed with code.  Instead, we get to use very clean syntax such as @View.Message.  This is a lot easier to read than <%:@View.Message%> especially when intermixed with html.  For example: <p> My name is @View.Name and I live at @View.Address </p> Compare this to the equivalent using the aspx view engine <p> My name is <%:View.Name %> and I live at <%: View.Address %> </p> While not an earth shaking simplification, it is easier on the eyes.  As  we explore other features, this clean markup will become more and more valuable.

    Read the article

  • A CMS based on Yii ?

    - by santa_cametotown
    Hi - i've been with Yii for a few months and before I use main CodeIgniter, SilverStripe in my projects. Does anyone know a good Yii based CMS such as SilverStripe based on Sapphire or EE based on CodeIgniter ? My experience is working with Yii is much more easier and straightforward assuming you are good OOP coder but Yii is still young and there are not lot of samples that I can put together quickly for a real prodcution project. A couple of YII based CMS I spotted at do not look really promising or maybe at a very early stage such as dotPlant, Web3CMS.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >