Search Results

Search found 62182 results on 2488 pages for 'asp net mvc controller'.

Page 55/2488 | < Previous Page | 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62  | Next Page >

  • How do I maintain scroll position in MVC?

    - by Eric Brown
    Im working on a project in MVC and have enjoyed learning about it. There are a few growing pains but once you figure them out it's not bad. One thing that is really simple in the WebForms world is maintaining the scroll position on a page. All you do is set the MaintainScrollPositionOnPostback property to true. However, in MVC, Im not using postbacks so this will not work for me. What is the standard way of handling this? Edit: Ajax is acceptable, but I was also wondering how you would do it without AJAX.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC: post-redirect-get pattern, with only two overloaded action methods

    - by Rafi
    Is it possible to implement post-redirect-get pattern, with two overloaded action methods(One for GET action and the other for POST action) in ASP.NET MVC. In all of the MVC post-redirect-get pattern samples, I have seen three different action methods for the post-redirect-get process, each having different names. Is this really required? For Eg:(Does the code shown below, follows Post-Redirect-Get pattern?) public class SalaryTransferController : Controller { // // GET: /SalaryTransfer/ [HttpGet] public ActionResult Index(int id) { SalaryTransferIndexViewModel vm = new SalaryTransferIndexViewModel(id) { SelectedDivision = DivisionEnum.Contracting }; //Do some processing here return View(vm); } // // POST: /SalaryTransfer/ [HttpPost] public ActionResult Index(SalaryTransferIndexViewModel vm) { bool validationsuccess = false; //validate if (validationsuccess) return RedirectToAction("Index", new {id=1234 }); else return View(vm); } } Thank you for your responses.

    Read the article

  • What is the order of execution when dealing with .NET MVC 2 Action Filters?

    - by user357933
    Say I have: [Attribute1(Order=0)] public class Controller1 { [Attribute2] [Attribute3] public ActionResult Action1() { ... } } The attributes get executed in the following order: 2, 3, 1 This makes sense because attributes 2 and 3 have an order of -1 and will be executed before attribute 1 which has an explicitly set order equal to 0. Now, lets say I have: [Attribute1] [Attribute2(Order=0)] public class Controller1 { [Attribute3] public ActionResult Action1() { ... } } The attributes get executed in the following order: 1, 2, 3 Why is it that attribute 2 in this case (which has an order equal to 0) is executed before attribute 3 (which has an order equal to -1)?

    Read the article

  • asp.mvc model design

    - by Radu D
    Hi, I am pretty new to MVC and I am looking for a way to design my models. I have the MVC web site project and another class library that takes care of data access and constructing the business objects. If I have in that assembly a class named Project that is a business object and I need to display all projects in a view ... should I make another model class Project? In this case the classes will be identical. Do I gain something from doing a new model class? I don't like having in views references to objects from another dll ... but i don't like duplicating the code neither. Did you encounter the same problem?

    Read the article

  • View artifacts leaking into the model of MVC

    - by Jono
    In an ASP.NET MVC application (which has very little chance of having its view technology ported to something non-HTML, but whose functional requirements evolve weekly,) how much HTML should ideally be allowed to be directly represented in the Model? I might come across as a design bigot for this, but I regard it as bad practice to allow any view constructs to "leak" into the model in an MVC application (and vice versa). For example, a Model that represents an item you're about to purchase should know nothing about the HTML check box that says "add giftwrap/message", nor should it know about any HTML drop down lists for payment card types. Conversely the View shouldn't be doing work like figuring out button text by translating keys into values (by looking in resource files.)

    Read the article

  • why developing ASP.NET - MVC?

    - by sam
    Hi Guys, I am new to web development, I am coding some ASP.NET, I checked a lot of examples using MVC in ASP.NET, But I am looking for verbal answers from senior programmers, about why using MVC? can U as seniors and team leaders show me the benefits?? and why not keeping using asp.net webforms? thanks

    Read the article

  • MVC 2 Beta DefaultControllerFactory with Areas

    - by stoto
    Why default factory WON'T return full name of the controllers (with namespaces)? I'm using Service Locator and autofac. using System.Web.Mvc; using Microsoft.Practices.ServiceLocation; namespace Application.Core.MVC { public override IController CreateController(System.Web.Routing.RequestContext requestContext, string **controllerName**) { return ServiceLocator.Current.GetInstance<IController>(controllerName); } } I had two home controllers (one under area Blog) http://localhost/Home http://localhost/Blog/Home controllerName return only "Home" without full qualified name for both in above code. This creates a problem when I try to regiser controllers' names for dependency injection. Here is how I register controllers right now according to this situation. Even this brings up the pages without exception. But When I access http://localhost/Home, both controllers invoked regardlessly. foreach (var tp in currentAssemblyControllersTypes) builder.Register(tp).FactoryScoped().Named(tp.Name.Replace("Controller", "")); Anyone can help?Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Spring 3 MVC - Form Failure Causes Exception When Reloading JSP

    - by jboyd
    Using Spring 3 MVC, please bear with the long code example, it's quite simple, but I want to make sure all relevant information is posted. Basically here is the use case: There is a registration page, a user can login, OR fill out a registration form. The login form is a simple HTML form, the registration form is a more complicated, Spring bound form that uses a RegistrationFormData bean. Here is the relevant code: UserController.java ... @RequestMapping(value = "/login", method = RequestMethod.GET) public String login(Model model) { model.addAttribute("registrationInfo", new ProfileAdminFormData()); return "login"; } ... @RequestMapping(value = "/login.do", method = RequestMethod.POST) public String doLogin( @RequestParam(value = "userName") String userName, @RequestParam(value = "password") String password, Model model) { logger.info("login.do : userName=" + userName + ", password=" + password); try { getUser().login(userName, password); } catch (UserNotFoundException ex) { logger.error(ex); model.addAttribute("loginError", ex.getWebViewableErrorMessage()); return "login"; } return "redirect:/"; } ... @RequestMapping(value = "/register.do") public String register( @ModelAttribute(value = "registrationInfo") ProfileAdminFormData profileAdminFormData, BindingResult result, Model model) { //todo: redirect if (new RegistrationValidator(profileAdminFormData, result).validate()) { try { User().register(profileAdminFormData); return "index"; } catch (UserException ex) { logger.error(ex); model.addAttribute("registrationErrorMessage", ex.getWebViewableErrorMessage()); return "login"; } } return "login"; } and the JSP: ... <form:form commandName="registrationInfo" action="register.do"> ... So the problem here is that when login fails I get an exception because there is no bean "registrationInfo" in the model attributes. What I need is that regardless of the path through this controller that the "registrationInfo" bean is not null, that way if login fails, as opposed to registration, that bean is still in the model. As you can see I create the registrationInfo object explicitly in my controller in the method bound to "/login", which is what I thought was going to be kind of a setup method" Something doesn't feel right about the "/login" method which sets up the page, but I needed to that in order to get the page to render at all without throwing an exception because there is no "registrationInfo" model attribute, as needed by the form in the JSP

    Read the article

  • PHP: MVC and DRY

    - by Pirkka
    Hello! Question about controllers. Can controller call it`s own class methods inside an action? EDIT: Oh sorry. I meant I dont want to repeat myself. :)

    Read the article

  • Question about modeling with MVC (the pattern, not the MS stuff / non web)

    - by paul
    I'm working on an application in which I'm looking to employ the MVC pattern, but I've come up against a design decision point I could use some help with. My application is going to deal with the design of state-machines. Currently the MVC model holds information about the machine's states, inputs, outputs, etc. The view is going to show a diagram for the machine, graphically allowing the user to add new states, establish transitions, and put the states in a pleasing arrangement, among other things. I would like to store part of the diagram's state (e.g. the x and y state positions) when the machine information is stored for later retrieval, and am wondering how best to go about structuring the model(s?) for this. It seems like this UI information is more closely related to the view than to the state-machine model, so I was thinking that a secondary model might be in order, but I am reluctant to pursue this route because of the added complexity. Adding this information to the current model doesn't seem the right way to go about it either. This is the my first time using the MVC pattern so I'm still figuring things out. Any input would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 2 UpdateModel() is not updating values in memory or database

    - by campbelt
    Hello, I am new to MVC, and so am working through the NerdDinner tutorial, here. In particular, I'm running into problems with the use of the UpdateModel method, which is explained in the part five of that tutorial. The problem is, when I try to edit the value of a dinner object using the UpdateModel method, the values do not get updated, and no exceptions are thrown. Oddly, I am not having any trouble with the Create or Delete features that are illustrated in the tutorial. Only the update feature isn't working. Below, I have included the Controller code that I am using, as well as the view markup, which is contained in both an aspx View file and an ascx Partial View file. Here is the code inside my Controller, called DinnerController.cs: // // GET: /Dinners/Edit/2 [Authorize] public ActionResult Edit(int id) { Dinner dinner = dinnerRepository.GetDinner(id); return View(new DinnerFormViewModel(dinner)); } // // POST: /Dinners/Edit/2 [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post), Authorize] public ActionResult Edit(int id, FormCollection formValues) { Dinner dinner = dinnerRepository.GetDinner(id); try { UpdateModel(dinner); var x = ViewData.GetModelStateErrors(); // <-- to catch other ModelState errors dinnerRepository.Save(); return RedirectToAction("Details", new { id = dinner.DinnerID }); } catch { ModelState.AddRuleViolations(dinner.GetRuleViolations()); return View(new DinnerFormViewModel(dinner)); } } The line with the comment "to catch other ModelState errors" was added after reading a possible solution from another StackOverflow thread, here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1461283/asp-net-mvc-updatemodel-not-updating-but-not-throwing-error Unfortunately, that solution didn't help me. Here is the corresponding markup in my Dinners/Edit.aspx View: <asp:Content ID="Main" ContentPlaceHolderID="MainContent" runat="server"> <h2>Edit Dinner</h2> <% Html.RenderPartial("DinnerForm"); %> </asp:Content> Here is the corresponding markup in my DinnerForm.ascx Partial View. This Partial View file is also used by the Create feature, which is working fine: <%=Html.ValidationSummary("Please correct the errors and try again.") %> <% using (Html.BeginForm()) { %> <fieldset> <p> <label for="Title">Dinner Title:</label> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(model => Model.Dinner.Title)%> <%=Html.ValidationMessage("Title", "*") %> </p> <p> <label for="EventDate">EventDate:</label> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(model => Model.Dinner.EventDate, new { value = String.Format("{0:g}", Model.Dinner.EventDate) })%> <%=Html.ValidationMessage("EventDate", "*") %> </p> <p> <label for="Description">Description:</label> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(model => Model.Dinner.Description)%> <%=Html.ValidationMessage("Description", "*")%> </p> <p> <label for="Address">Address:</label> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(model => Model.Dinner.Address)%> <%=Html.ValidationMessage("Address", "*") %> </p> <p> <label for="Country">Country:</label> <%=Html.DropDownListFor(model => Model.Dinner.Country, Model.Countries)%> <%=Html.ValidationMessage("Country", "*") %> </p> <p> <label for="ContactPhone">ContactPhone #:</label> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(model => Model.Dinner.ContactPhone)%> <%=Html.ValidationMessage("ContactPhone", "*") %> </p> <p> <label for="Latitude">Latitude:</label> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(model => Model.Dinner.Latitude)%> <%=Html.ValidationMessage("Latitude", "*") %> </p> <p> <label for="Longitude">Longitude:</label> <%=Html.TextBoxFor(model => Model.Dinner.Longitude)%> <%=Html.ValidationMessage("Longitude", "*") %> </p> <p> <input type="submit" value="Save"/> </p> </fieldset> <% } %> In any case, I've been hitting away at this for hours, and I'm out of ideas. So, I'm hoping someone here can help nudge me in the right direction, in order to figure out what I'm doing wrong.

    Read the article

  • click event launched only once problem

    - by user281180
    I have a form in which I have many checkboxes. I need to post the data to the controller upon any checkbox checked or unchecked, i.e a click on a checbox must post to the controller, and there is no submit button. What will be the bet method in this case? I have though of Ajax.BeginForm and have the codes below. The problem im having is that the checkbox click event is being detected only once and after that the click event isnt being launched. Why is that so? How can I correct that? <% using (Ajax.BeginForm("Edit", new AjaxOptions { UpdateTargetId = "tests"})) {%> <div id="tests"> <%Html.RenderPartial("Details", Model); %> </div> <input type="submit" value="Save" style="Viibility:hidden" id="myForm"/> <%} %> $(function() { $('input:checkbox').click(function() { $('#myForm').click(); }); });

    Read the article

  • when to clear or make null asp .net mvc models?

    - by SARAVAN
    HI, I am working in an asp .net mvc application. I am using the model and storing some of the values which i need to preserve between the page posts, in the form of datacontexts. Say my model looks something like this: public SelectedUser SelectedUserDetails { //get and set has //this.datacontext.data.SelectedUser = ..... //return this.datacontext.data..... } Now when this model needs to be cleared? I have many such models with many properties and datacontext. But I don't have an idea on when to clear it. Is there a way or an event that can be triggered automatically when the model is not used for a long time? Oneway I thought is when i navigate away from a page which uses my underlying model, I can clear that model if its no longer used anywhere and initialise it back as needed. But I need to clear almost many models at many points. Is there an automatic way that can clear models when it is no longer used beacuse care can be taken by my code to initialise them when I need them, but I don't know when to clear them when I no longer need them. I need this to get rid of any memory related issues. Any thoughts or comments?

    Read the article

  • Integrating JavaScript Unit Tests with Visual Studio

    - by Stephen Walther
    Modern ASP.NET web applications take full advantage of client-side JavaScript to provide better interactivity and responsiveness. If you are building an ASP.NET application in the right way, you quickly end up with lots and lots of JavaScript code. When writing server code, you should be writing unit tests. One big advantage of unit tests is that they provide you with a safety net that enable you to safely modify your existing code – for example, fix bugs, add new features, and make performance enhancements -- without breaking your existing code. Every time you modify your code, you can execute your unit tests to verify that you have not broken anything. For the same reason that you should write unit tests for your server code, you should write unit tests for your client code. JavaScript is just as susceptible to bugs as C#. There is no shortage of unit testing frameworks for JavaScript. Each of the major JavaScript libraries has its own unit testing framework. For example, jQuery has QUnit, Prototype has UnitTestJS, YUI has YUI Test, and Dojo has Dojo Objective Harness (DOH). The challenge is integrating a JavaScript unit testing framework with Visual Studio. Visual Studio and Visual Studio ALM provide fantastic support for server-side unit tests. You can easily view the results of running your unit tests in the Visual Studio Test Results window. You can set up a check-in policy which requires that all unit tests pass before your source code can be committed to the source code repository. In addition, you can set up Team Build to execute your unit tests automatically. Unfortunately, Visual Studio does not provide “out-of-the-box” support for JavaScript unit tests. MS Test, the unit testing framework included in Visual Studio, does not support JavaScript unit tests. As soon as you leave the server world, you are left on your own. The goal of this blog entry is to describe one approach to integrating JavaScript unit tests with MS Test so that you can execute your JavaScript unit tests side-by-side with your C# unit tests. The goal is to enable you to execute JavaScript unit tests in exactly the same way as server-side unit tests. You can download the source code described by this project by scrolling to the end of this blog entry. Rejected Approach: Browser Launchers One popular approach to executing JavaScript unit tests is to use a browser as a test-driver. When you use a browser as a test-driver, you open up a browser window to execute and view the results of executing your JavaScript unit tests. For example, QUnit – the unit testing framework for jQuery – takes this approach. The following HTML page illustrates how you can use QUnit to create a unit test for a function named addNumbers(). <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd"> <html> <head> <title>Using QUnit</title> <link rel="stylesheet" href="http://github.com/jquery/qunit/raw/master/qunit/qunit.css" type="text/css" /> </head> <body> <h1 id="qunit-header">QUnit example</h1> <h2 id="qunit-banner"></h2> <div id="qunit-testrunner-toolbar"></div> <h2 id="qunit-userAgent"></h2> <ol id="qunit-tests"></ol> <div id="qunit-fixture">test markup, will be hidden</div> <script type="text/javascript" src="http://code.jquery.com/jquery-latest.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript" src="http://github.com/jquery/qunit/raw/master/qunit/qunit.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> // The function to test function addNumbers(a, b) { return a+b; } // The unit test test("Test of addNumbers", function () { equals(4, addNumbers(1,3), "1+3 should be 4"); }); </script> </body> </html> This test verifies that calling addNumbers(1,3) returns the expected value 4. When you open this page in a browser, you can see that this test does, in fact, pass. The idea is that you can quickly refresh this QUnit HTML JavaScript test driver page in your browser whenever you modify your JavaScript code. In other words, you can keep a browser window open and keep refreshing it over and over while you are developing your application. That way, you can know very quickly whenever you have broken your JavaScript code. While easy to setup, there are several big disadvantages to this approach to executing JavaScript unit tests: You must view your JavaScript unit test results in a different location than your server unit test results. The JavaScript unit test results appear in the browser and the server unit test results appear in the Visual Studio Test Results window. Because all of your unit test results don’t appear in a single location, you are more likely to introduce bugs into your code without noticing it. Because your unit tests are not integrated with Visual Studio – in particular, MS Test -- you cannot easily include your JavaScript unit tests when setting up check-in policies or when performing automated builds with Team Build. A more sophisticated approach to using a browser as a test-driver is to automate the web browser. Instead of launching the browser and loading the test code yourself, you use a framework to automate this process. There are several different testing frameworks that support this approach: · Selenium – Selenium is a very powerful framework for automating browser tests. You can create your tests by recording a Firefox session or by writing the test driver code in server code such as C#. You can learn more about Selenium at http://seleniumhq.org/. LTAF – The ASP.NET team uses the Lightweight Test Automation Framework to test JavaScript code in the ASP.NET framework. You can learn more about LTAF by visiting the project home at CodePlex: http://aspnet.codeplex.com/releases/view/35501 jsTestDriver – This framework uses Java to automate the browser. jsTestDriver creates a server which can be used to automate multiple browsers simultaneously. This project is located at http://code.google.com/p/js-test-driver/ TestSwam – This framework, created by John Resig, uses PHP to automate the browser. Like jsTestDriver, the framework creates a test server. You can open multiple browsers that are automated by the test server. Learn more about TestSwarm by visiting the following address: https://github.com/jeresig/testswarm/wiki Yeti – This is the framework introduced by Yahoo for automating browser tests. Yeti uses server-side JavaScript and depends on Node.js. Learn more about Yeti at http://www.yuiblog.com/blog/2010/08/25/introducing-yeti-the-yui-easy-testing-interface/ All of these frameworks are great for integration tests – however, they are not the best frameworks to use for unit tests. In one way or another, all of these frameworks depend on executing tests within the context of a “living and breathing” browser. If you create an ASP.NET Unit Test then Visual Studio will launch a web server before executing the unit test. Why is launching a web server so bad? It is not the worst thing in the world. However, it does introduce dependencies that prevent your code from being tested in isolation. One of the defining features of a unit test -- versus an integration test – is that a unit test tests code in isolation. Another problem with launching a web server when performing unit tests is that launching a web server can be slow. If you cannot execute your unit tests quickly, you are less likely to execute your unit tests each and every time you make a code change. You are much more likely to fall into the pit of failure. Launching a browser when performing a JavaScript unit test has all of the same disadvantages as launching a web server when performing an ASP.NET unit test. Instead of testing a unit of JavaScript code in isolation, you are testing JavaScript code within the context of a particular browser. Using the frameworks listed above for integration tests makes perfect sense. However, I want to consider a different approach for creating unit tests for JavaScript code. Using Server-Side JavaScript for JavaScript Unit Tests A completely different approach to executing JavaScript unit tests is to perform the tests outside of any browser. If you really want to test JavaScript then you should test JavaScript and leave the browser out of the testing process. There are several ways that you can execute JavaScript on the server outside the context of any browser: Rhino – Rhino is an implementation of JavaScript written in Java. The Rhino project is maintained by the Mozilla project. Learn more about Rhino at http://www.mozilla.org/rhino/ V8 – V8 is the open-source Google JavaScript engine written in C++. This is the JavaScript engine used by the Chrome web browser. You can download V8 and embed it in your project by visiting http://code.google.com/p/v8/ JScript – JScript is the JavaScript Script Engine used by Internet Explorer (up to but not including Internet Explorer 9), Windows Script Host, and Active Server Pages. Internet Explorer is still the most popular web browser. Therefore, I decided to focus on using the JScript Script Engine to execute JavaScript unit tests. Using the Microsoft Script Control There are two basic ways that you can pass JavaScript to the JScript Script Engine and execute the code: use the Microsoft Windows Script Interfaces or use the Microsoft Script Control. The difficult and proper way to execute JavaScript using the JScript Script Engine is to use the Microsoft Windows Script Interfaces. You can learn more about the Script Interfaces by visiting http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/t9d4xf28(VS.85).aspx The main disadvantage of using the Script Interfaces is that they are difficult to use from .NET. There is a great series of articles on using the Script Interfaces from C# located at http://www.drdobbs.com/184406028. I picked the easier alternative and used the Microsoft Script Control. The Microsoft Script Control is an ActiveX control that provides a higher level abstraction over the Window Script Interfaces. You can download the Microsoft Script Control from here: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=d7e31492-2595-49e6-8c02-1426fec693ac After you download the Microsoft Script Control, you need to add a reference to it to your project. Select the Visual Studio menu option Project, Add Reference to open the Add Reference dialog. Select the COM tab and add the Microsoft Script Control 1.0. Using the Script Control is easy. You call the Script Control AddCode() method to add JavaScript code to the Script Engine. Next, you call the Script Control Run() method to run a particular JavaScript function. The reference documentation for the Microsoft Script Control is located at the MSDN website: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa227633%28v=vs.60%29.aspx Creating the JavaScript Code to Test To keep things simple, let’s imagine that you want to test the following JavaScript function named addNumbers() which simply adds two numbers together: MvcApplication1\Scripts\Math.js function addNumbers(a, b) { return 5; } Notice that the addNumbers() method always returns the value 5. Right-now, it will not pass a good unit test. Create this file and save it in your project with the name Math.js in your MVC project’s Scripts folder (Save the file in your actual MVC application and not your MVC test application). Creating the JavaScript Test Helper Class To make it easier to use the Microsoft Script Control in unit tests, we can create a helper class. This class contains two methods: LoadFile() – Loads a JavaScript file. Use this method to load the JavaScript file being tested or the JavaScript file containing the unit tests. ExecuteTest() – Executes the JavaScript code. Use this method to execute a JavaScript unit test. Here’s the code for the JavaScriptTestHelper class: JavaScriptTestHelper.cs   using System; using System.IO; using Microsoft.VisualStudio.TestTools.UnitTesting; using MSScriptControl; namespace MvcApplication1.Tests { public class JavaScriptTestHelper : IDisposable { private ScriptControl _sc; private TestContext _context; /// <summary> /// You need to use this helper with Unit Tests and not /// Basic Unit Tests because you need a Test Context /// </summary> /// <param name="testContext">Unit Test Test Context</param> public JavaScriptTestHelper(TestContext testContext) { if (testContext == null) { throw new ArgumentNullException("TestContext"); } _context = testContext; _sc = new ScriptControl(); _sc.Language = "JScript"; _sc.AllowUI = false; } /// <summary> /// Load the contents of a JavaScript file into the /// Script Engine. /// </summary> /// <param name="path">Path to JavaScript file</param> public void LoadFile(string path) { var fileContents = File.ReadAllText(path); _sc.AddCode(fileContents); } /// <summary> /// Pass the path of the test that you want to execute. /// </summary> /// <param name="testMethodName">JavaScript function name</param> public void ExecuteTest(string testMethodName) { dynamic result = null; try { result = _sc.Run(testMethodName, new object[] { }); } catch { var error = ((IScriptControl)_sc).Error; if (error != null) { var description = error.Description; var line = error.Line; var column = error.Column; var text = error.Text; var source = error.Source; if (_context != null) { var details = String.Format("{0} \r\nLine: {1} Column: {2}", source, line, column); _context.WriteLine(details); } } throw new AssertFailedException(error.Description); } } public void Dispose() { _sc = null; } } }     Notice that the JavaScriptTestHelper class requires a Test Context to be instantiated. For this reason, you can use the JavaScriptTestHelper only with a Visual Studio Unit Test and not a Basic Unit Test (These are two different types of Visual Studio project items). Add the JavaScriptTestHelper file to your MVC test application (for example, MvcApplication1.Tests). Creating the JavaScript Unit Test Next, we need to create the JavaScript unit test function that we will use to test the addNumbers() function. Create a folder in your MVC test project named JavaScriptTests and add the following JavaScript file to this folder: MvcApplication1.Tests\JavaScriptTests\MathTest.js /// <reference path="JavaScriptUnitTestFramework.js"/> function testAddNumbers() { // Act var result = addNumbers(1, 3); // Assert assert.areEqual(4, result, "addNumbers did not return right value!"); }   The testAddNumbers() function takes advantage of another JavaScript library named JavaScriptUnitTestFramework.js. This library contains all of the code necessary to make assertions. Add the following JavaScriptnitTestFramework.js to the same folder as the MathTest.js file: MvcApplication1.Tests\JavaScriptTests\JavaScriptUnitTestFramework.js var assert = { areEqual: function (expected, actual, message) { if (expected !== actual) { throw new Error("Expected value " + expected + " is not equal to " + actual + ". " + message); } } }; There is only one type of assertion supported by this file: the areEqual() assertion. Most likely, you would want to add additional types of assertions to this file to make it easier to write your JavaScript unit tests. Deploying the JavaScript Test Files This step is non-intuitive. When you use Visual Studio to run unit tests, Visual Studio creates a new folder and executes a copy of the files in your project. After you run your unit tests, your Visual Studio Solution will contain a new folder named TestResults that includes a subfolder for each test run. You need to configure Visual Studio to deploy your JavaScript files to the test run folder or Visual Studio won’t be able to find your JavaScript files when you execute your unit tests. You will get an error that looks something like this when you attempt to execute your unit tests: You can configure Visual Studio to deploy your JavaScript files by adding a Test Settings file to your Visual Studio Solution. It is important to understand that you need to add this file to your Visual Studio Solution and not a particular Visual Studio project. Right-click your Solution in the Solution Explorer window and select the menu option Add, New Item. Select the Test Settings item and click the Add button. After you create a Test Settings file for your solution, you can indicate that you want a particular folder to be deployed whenever you perform a test run. Select the menu option Test, Edit Test Settings to edit your test configuration file. Select the Deployment tab and select your MVC test project’s JavaScriptTest folder to deploy. Click the Apply button and the Close button to save the changes and close the dialog. Creating the Visual Studio Unit Test The very last step is to create the Visual Studio unit test (the MS Test unit test). Add a new unit test to your MVC test project by selecting the menu option Add New Item and selecting the Unit Test project item (Do not select the Basic Unit Test project item): The difference between a Basic Unit Test and a Unit Test is that a Unit Test includes a Test Context. We need this Test Context to use the JavaScriptTestHelper class that we created earlier. Enter the following test method for the new unit test: [TestMethod] public void TestAddNumbers() { var jsHelper = new JavaScriptTestHelper(this.TestContext); // Load JavaScript files jsHelper.LoadFile("JavaScriptUnitTestFramework.js"); jsHelper.LoadFile(@"..\..\..\MvcApplication1\Scripts\Math.js"); jsHelper.LoadFile("MathTest.js"); // Execute JavaScript Test jsHelper.ExecuteTest("testAddNumbers"); } This code uses the JavaScriptTestHelper to load three files: JavaScripUnitTestFramework.js – Contains the assert functions. Math.js – Contains the addNumbers() function from your MVC application which is being tested. MathTest.js – Contains the JavaScript unit test function. Next, the test method calls the JavaScriptTestHelper ExecuteTest() method to execute the testAddNumbers() JavaScript function. Running the Visual Studio JavaScript Unit Test After you complete all of the steps described above, you can execute the JavaScript unit test just like any other unit test. You can use the keyboard combination CTRL-R, CTRL-A to run all of the tests in the current Visual Studio Solution. Alternatively, you can use the buttons in the Visual Studio toolbar to run the tests: (Unfortunately, the Run All Impacted Tests button won’t work correctly because Visual Studio won’t detect that your JavaScript code has changed. Therefore, you should use either the Run Tests in Current Context or Run All Tests in Solution options instead.) The results of running the JavaScript tests appear side-by-side with the results of running the server tests in the Test Results window. For example, if you Run All Tests in Solution then you will get the following results: Notice that the TestAddNumbers() JavaScript test has failed. That is good because our addNumbers() function is hard-coded to always return the value 5. If you double-click the failing JavaScript test, you can view additional details such as the JavaScript error message and the line number of the JavaScript code that failed: Summary The goal of this blog entry was to explain an approach to creating JavaScript unit tests that can be easily integrated with Visual Studio and Visual Studio ALM. I described how you can use the Microsoft Script Control to execute JavaScript on the server. By taking advantage of the Microsoft Script Control, we were able to execute our JavaScript unit tests side-by-side with all of our other unit tests and view the results in the standard Visual Studio Test Results window. You can download the code discussed in this blog entry from here: http://StephenWalther.com/downloads/Blog/JavaScriptUnitTesting/JavaScriptUnitTests.zip Before running this code, you need to first install the Microsoft Script Control which you can download from here: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/en/details.aspx?FamilyID=d7e31492-2595-49e6-8c02-1426fec693ac

    Read the article

  • RSS feeds in Orchard

    - by Bertrand Le Roy
    When we added RSS to Orchard, we wanted to make it easy for any module to expose any contents as a feed. We also wanted the rendering of the feed to be handled by Orchard in order to minimize the amount of work from the module developer. A typical example of such feed exposition is of course blog feeds. We have an IFeedManager interface for which you can get the built-in implementation through dependency injection. Look at the BlogController constructor for an example: public BlogController( IOrchardServices services, IBlogService blogService, IBlogSlugConstraint blogSlugConstraint, IFeedManager feedManager, RouteCollection routeCollection) { If you look a little further in that same controller, in the Item action, you’ll see a call to the Register method of the feed manager: _feedManager.Register(blog); This in reality is a call into an extension method that is specialized for blogs, but we could have made the two calls to the actual generic Register directly in the action instead, that is just an implementation detail: feedManager.Register(blog.Name, "rss", new RouteValueDictionary { { "containerid", blog.Id } }); feedManager.Register(blog.Name + " - Comments", "rss", new RouteValueDictionary { { "commentedoncontainer", blog.Id } }); What those two effective calls are doing is to register two feeds: one for the blog itself and one for the comments on the blog. For each call, the name of the feed is provided, then we have the type of feed (“rss”) and some values to be injected into the generic RSS route that will be used later to route the feed to the right providers. This is all you have to do to expose a new feed. If you’re only interested in exposing feeds, you can stop right there. If on the other hand you want to know what happens after that under the hood, carry on. What happens after that is that the feedmanager will take care of formatting the link tag for the feed (see FeedManager.GetRegisteredLinks). The GetRegisteredLinks method itself will be called from a specialized filter, FeedFilter. FeedFilter is an MVC filter and the event we’re interested in hooking into is OnResultExecuting, which happens after the controller action has returned an ActionResult and just before MVC executes that action result. In other words, our feed registration has already been called but the view is not yet rendered. Here’s the code for OnResultExecuting: model.Zones.AddAction("head:after", html => html.ViewContext.Writer.Write( _feedManager.GetRegisteredLinks(html))); This is another piece of code whose execution is differed. It is saying that whenever comes time to render the “head” zone, this code should be called right after. The code itself is rendering the link tags. As a result of all that, here’s what can be found in an Orchard blog’s head section: <link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml"     title="Tales from the Evil Empire"     href="/rss?containerid=5" /> <link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml"     title="Tales from the Evil Empire - Comments"     href="/rss?commentedoncontainer=5" /> The generic action that these two feeds point to is Index on FeedController. That controller has three important dependencies: an IFeedBuilderProvider, an IFeedQueryProvider and an IFeedItemProvider. Different implementations of these interfaces can provide different formats of feeds, such as RSS and Atom. The Match method enables each of the competing providers to provide a priority for themselves based on arbitrary criteria that can be found on the FeedContext. This means that a provider can be selected based not only on the desired format, but also on the nature of the objects being exposed as a feed or on something even more arbitrary such as the destination device (you could imagine for example giving shorter text only excerpts of posts on mobile devices, and full HTML on desktop). The key here is extensibility and dynamic competition and collaboration from unknown and loosely coupled parts. You’ll find this pattern pretty much everywhere in the Orchard architecture. The RssFeedBuilder implementation of IFeedBuilderProvider is also a regular controller with a Process action that builds a RssResult, which is itself a thin ActionResult wrapper around an XDocument. Let’s get back to the FeedController’s Index action. After having called into each known feed builder to get its priority on the currently requested feed, it will select the one with the highest priority. The next thing it needs to do is to actually fetch the data for the feed. This again is a collaborative effort from a priori unknown providers, the implementations of IFeedQueryProvider. There are several implementations by default in Orchard, the choice of which is again done through a Match method. ContainerFeedQuery for example chimes in when a “containerid” parameter is found in the context (see URL in the link tag above): public FeedQueryMatch Match(FeedContext context) { var containerIdValue = context.ValueProvider.GetValue("containerid"); if (containerIdValue == null) return null; return new FeedQueryMatch { FeedQuery = this, Priority = -5 }; } The actual work is done in the Execute method, which finds the right container content item in the Orchard database and adds elements for each of them. In other words, the feed query provider knows how to retrieve the list of content items to add to the feed. The last step is to translate each of the content items into feed entries, which is done by implementations of IFeedItemBuilder. There is no Match method this time. Instead, all providers are called with the collection of items (or more accurately with the FeedContext, but this contains the list of items, which is what’s relevant in most cases). Each provider can then choose to pick those items that it knows how to treat and transform them into the format requested. This enables the construction of heterogeneous feeds that expose content items of various types into a single feed. That will be extremely important when you’ll want to expose a single feed for all your site. So here are feeds in Orchard in a nutshell. The main point here is that there is a fair number of components involved, with some complexity in implementation in order to allow for extreme flexibility, but the part that you use to expose a new feed is extremely simple and light: declare that you want your content exposed as a feed and you’re done. There are cases where you’ll have to dive in and provide new implementations for some or all of the interfaces involved, but that requirement will only arise as needed. For example, you might need to create a new feed item builder to include your custom content type but that effort will be extremely focused on the specialized task at hand. The rest of the system won’t need to change. So what do you think?

    Read the article

  • Adding multiple data importers support to web applications

    - by DigiMortal
    I’m building web application for customer and there is requirement that users must be able to import data in different formats. Today we will support XLSX and ODF as import formats and some other formats are waiting. I wanted to be able to add new importers on the fly so I don’t have to deploy web application again when I add new importer or change some existing one. In this posting I will show you how to build generic importers support to your web application. Importer interface All importers we use must have something in common so we can easily detect them. To keep things simple I will use interface here. public interface IMyImporter {     string[] SupportedFileExtensions { get; }     ImportResult Import(Stream fileStream, string fileExtension); } Our interface has the following members: SupportedFileExtensions – string array of file extensions that importer supports. This property helps us find out what import formats are available and which importer to use with given format. Import – method that does the actual importing work. Besides file we give in as stream we also give file extension so importer can decide how to handle the file. It is enough to get started. When building real importers I am sure you will switch over to abstract base class. Importer class Here is sample importer that imports data from Excel and Word documents. Importer class with no implementation details looks like this: public class MyOpenXmlImporter : IMyImporter {     public string[] SupportedFileExtensions     {         get { return new[] { "xlsx", "docx" }; }     }     public ImportResult Import(Stream fileStream, string extension)     {         // ...     } } Finding supported import formats in web application Now we have importers created and it’s time to add them to web application. Usually we have one page or ASP.NET MVC controller where we need importers. To this page or controller we add the following method that uses reflection to find all classes that implement our IMyImporter interface. private static string[] GetImporterFileExtensions() {     var types = from a in AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies()                 from t in a.GetTypes()                 where t.GetInterfaces().Contains(typeof(IMyImporter))                 select t;       var extensions = new Collection<string>();     foreach (var type in types)     {         var instance = (IMyImporter)type.InvokeMember(null,                        BindingFlags.CreateInstance, null, null, null);           foreach (var extension in instance.SupportedFileExtensions)         {             if (extensions.Contains(extension))                 continue;               extensions.Add(extension);         }     }       return extensions.ToArray(); } This code doesn’t look nice and is far from optimal but it works for us now. It is possible to improve performance of web application if we cache extensions and their corresponding types to some static dictionary. We have to fill it only once because our application is restarted when something changes in bin folder. Finding importer by extension When user uploads file we need to detect the extension of file and find the importer that supports given extension. We add another method to our page or controller that uses reflection to return us importer instance or null if extension is not supported. private static IMyImporter GetImporterForExtension(string extensionToFind) {     var types = from a in AppDomain.CurrentDomain.GetAssemblies()                 from t in a.GetTypes()                 where t.GetInterfaces().Contains(typeof(IMyImporter))                 select t;     foreach (var type in types)     {         var instance = (IMyImporter)type.InvokeMember(null,                        BindingFlags.CreateInstance, null, null, null);           if (instance.SupportedFileExtensions.Contains(extensionToFind))         {             return instance;         }     }       return null; } Here is example ASP.NET MVC controller action that accepts uploaded file, finds importer that can handle file and imports data. Again, this is sample code I kept minimal to better illustrate how things work. public ActionResult Import(MyImporterModel model) {     var file = Request.Files[0];     var extension = Path.GetExtension(file.FileName).ToLower();     var importer = GetImporterForExtension(extension.Substring(1));     var result = importer.Import(file.InputStream, extension);     if (result.Errors.Count > 0)     {         foreach (var error in result.Errors)             ModelState.AddModelError("file", error);           return Import();     }     return RedirectToAction("Index"); } Conclusion That’s it. Using couple of ugly methods and one simple interface we were able to add importers support to our web application. Example code here is not perfect but it works. It is possible to cache mappings between file extensions and importer types to some static variable because changing of these mappings means that something is changed in bin folder of web application and web application is restarted in this case anyway.

    Read the article

  • ASP.net Ajax tab container not appearing

    - by Eyla
    I created new web project using VS 2008 with enabled Ajax template with C# and Framework 3.5. I added Ajax reference to the project and I can see all Ajax toolkit in my tool box. The problem that when I add tab container with Tab Panels then run the projects nothing appear on the browser and I tried few browsers. I'm including my code and I wish that someone would help me. Regards, My Code: ................................................................ <%@ Page Language="C#" AutoEventWireup="true" CodeBehind="Default.aspx.cs" Inherits="Contacts._Default" %> <%@ Register assembly="AjaxControlToolkit" namespace="AjaxControlToolkit" tagprefix="asp" %> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" > <head runat="server"> <title>Untitled Page</title> </head> <body> <form id="form1" runat="server"> <asp:ScriptManager ID="ScriptManager1" runat="server" /> <div> <asp:TabContainer ID="TabContainer1" runat="server" ActiveTabIndex="0"> <asp:TabPanel runat="server" HeaderText="TabPanel1" ID="TabPanel1"> <ContentTemplate> tab 1 </ContentTemplate> </asp:TabPanel> <asp:TabPanel runat="server" HeaderText="TabPanel2" ID="TabPanel2"> <ContentTemplate> tab 2 </ContentTemplate> </asp:TabPanel> <asp:TabPanel runat="server" HeaderText="TabPanel3" ID="TabPanel3"> <ContentTemplate> tab 3 </ContentTemplate> </asp:TabPanel> </asp:TabContainer> </div> </form> </body> </html>

    Read the article

  • How to specify an area name in an action link?

    - by Jeremy
    I have a shared master page which I am using from 2 different areas in my mvc 2 app. The master page has an action link which currently specifies the controller and action, but of course the link doesn't work if I'm in the wrong area. I see no overload for actionlink that takes an area parameter, is it possible to do?

    Read the article

  • asp mvc unit test HttpContext.Current.Cache?

    - by Paul Creasey
    Here is the first part of my controller code: public class ControlMController : Controller { IControlMService _controlMservice; public IList<User> Users { get { if (System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Cache["users"] == null) { System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Cache["users"] = _controlMservice.GetUsers(); } return (IList<User>)System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Cache["users"]; } } public ControlMController(IControlMService controlMservice) { this._controlMservice = controlMservice; var users = Users; ViewData["Users"] = users; ViewData["jqSelectUsers"] = string.Join(";", users.Select(x => x.UserID + ":" + x.Name).ToArray()); } I'm trying to test it, and because i'm caching using the HttpContext, i'm struggling with null reference exceptions. I've tried using MvcContrib.TestHelper; here is my sample test... [TestMethod] public void EventDetails_Returns_view_with_correct_event() { var builder = new TestControllerBuilder(); var controller = builder.CreateController<ControlMController>( new ControlMService( new MockControlMRepository() )); var view = (controller.EventDetails(1) as ViewResult); Assert.AreEqual(1, (view.ViewData.Model as Event).EventId); } (I haven't quite got round to using DI for my tests! I'm still getting the same null reference exception when the code hits the httpcontext: Error 1 TestCase 'SupportTool.Tests.Services.ControlM.ControlMControllerTests.EventDetails_Returns_view_with_correct_event' failed: System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object. at SupportTool.web.Controllers.ControlMController.get_Users() Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • mvc - how to avoid log out when refresh a page

    - by user235973457
    I have built the MVC application with WCF service. The major problem I have experienced with refreshing page. I have created a login page with session (username and password). But when you refresh the home page by pressing F5, it would automatically log out. That is my problem. I need to stay the home page after refresh. I have been googling around to find a solution but it seems not helpful. Any idea? Your advise or code example much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Where does ASP.NET Web API Fit?

    - by Rick Strahl
    With the pending release of ASP.NET MVC 4 and the new ASP.NET Web API, there has been a lot of discussion of where the new Web API technology fits in the ASP.NET Web stack. There are a lot of choices to build HTTP based applications available now on the stack - we've come a long way from when WebForms and Http Handlers/Modules where the only real options. Today we have WebForms, MVC, ASP.NET Web Pages, ASP.NET AJAX, WCF REST and now Web API as well as the core ASP.NET runtime to choose to build HTTP content with. Web API definitely squarely addresses the 'API' aspect - building consumable services - rather than HTML content, but even to that end there are a lot of choices you have today. So where does Web API fit, and when doesn't it? But before we get into that discussion, let's talk about what a Web API is and why we should care. What's a Web API? HTTP 'APIs' (Microsoft's new terminology for a service I guess)  are becoming increasingly more important with the rise of the many devices in use today. Most mobile devices like phones and tablets run Apps that are using data retrieved from the Web over HTTP. Desktop applications are also moving in this direction with more and more online content and synching moving into even traditional desktop applications. The pending Windows 8 release promises an app like platform for both the desktop and other devices, that also emphasizes consuming data from the Cloud. Likewise many Web browser hosted applications these days are relying on rich client functionality to create and manipulate the browser user interface, using AJAX rather than server generated HTML data to load up the user interface with data. These mobile or rich Web applications use their HTTP connection to return data rather than HTML markup in the form of JSON or XML typically. But an API can also serve other kinds of data, like images or other binary files, or even text data and HTML (although that's less common). A Web API is what feeds rich applications with data. ASP.NET Web API aims to service this particular segment of Web development by providing easy semantics to route and handle incoming requests and an easy to use platform to serve HTTP data in just about any content format you choose to create and serve from the server. But .NET already has various HTTP Platforms The .NET stack already includes a number of technologies that provide the ability to create HTTP service back ends, and it has done so since the very beginnings of the .NET platform. From raw HTTP Handlers and Modules in the core ASP.NET runtime, to high level platforms like ASP.NET MVC, Web Forms, ASP.NET AJAX and the WCF REST engine (which technically is not ASP.NET, but can integrate with it), you've always been able to handle just about any kind of HTTP request and response with ASP.NET. The beauty of the raw ASP.NET platform is that it provides you everything you need to build just about any type of HTTP application you can dream up from low level APIs/custom engines to high level HTML generation engine. ASP.NET as a core platform clearly has stood the test of time 10+ years later and all other frameworks like Web API are built on top of this ASP.NET core. However, although it's possible to create Web APIs / Services using any of the existing out of box .NET technologies, none of them have been a really nice fit for building arbitrary HTTP based APIs. Sure, you can use an HttpHandler to create just about anything, but you have to build a lot of plumbing to build something more complex like a comprehensive API that serves a variety of requests, handles multiple output formats and can easily pass data up to the server in a variety of ways. Likewise you can use ASP.NET MVC to handle routing and creating content in various formats fairly easily, but it doesn't provide a great way to automatically negotiate content types and serve various content formats directly (it's possible to do with some plumbing code of your own but not built in). Prior to Web API, Microsoft's main push for HTTP services has been WCF REST, which was always an awkward technology that had a severe personality conflict, not being clear on whether it wanted to be part of WCF or purely a separate technology. In the end it didn't do either WCF compatibility or WCF agnostic pure HTTP operation very well, which made for a very developer-unfriendly environment. Personally I didn't like any of the implementations at the time, so much so that I ended up building my own HTTP service engine (as part of the West Wind Web Toolkit), as have a few other third party tools that provided much better integration and ease of use. With the release of Web API for the first time I feel that I can finally use the tools in the box and not have to worry about creating and maintaining my own toolkit as Web API addresses just about all the features I implemented on my own and much more. ASP.NET Web API provides a better HTTP Experience ASP.NET Web API differentiates itself from the previous Microsoft in-box HTTP service solutions in that it was built from the ground up around the HTTP protocol and its messaging semantics. Unlike WCF REST or ASP.NET AJAX with ASMX, it’s a brand new platform rather than bolted on technology that is supposed to work in the context of an existing framework. The strength of the new ASP.NET Web API is that it combines the best features of the platforms that came before it, to provide a comprehensive and very usable HTTP platform. Because it's based on ASP.NET and borrows a lot of concepts from ASP.NET MVC, Web API should be immediately familiar and comfortable to most ASP.NET developers. Here are some of the features that Web API provides that I like: Strong Support for URL Routing to produce clean URLs using familiar MVC style routing semantics Content Negotiation based on Accept headers for request and response serialization Support for a host of supported output formats including JSON, XML, ATOM Strong default support for REST semantics but they are optional Easily extensible Formatter support to add new input/output types Deep support for more advanced HTTP features via HttpResponseMessage and HttpRequestMessage classes and strongly typed Enums to describe many HTTP operations Convention based design that drives you into doing the right thing for HTTP Services Very extensible, based on MVC like extensibility model of Formatters and Filters Self-hostable in non-Web applications  Testable using testing concepts similar to MVC Web API is meant to handle any kind of HTTP input and produce output and status codes using the full spectrum of HTTP functionality available in a straight forward and flexible manner. Looking at the list above you can see that a lot of functionality is very similar to ASP.NET MVC, so many ASP.NET developers should feel quite comfortable with the concepts of Web API. The Routing and core infrastructure of Web API are very similar to how MVC works providing many of the benefits of MVC, but with focus on HTTP access and manipulation in Controller methods rather than HTML generation in MVC. There’s much improved support for content negotiation based on HTTP Accept headers with the framework capable of detecting automatically what content the client is sending and requesting and serving the appropriate data format in return. This seems like such a little and obvious thing, but it's really important. Today's service backends often are used by multiple clients/applications and being able to choose the right data format for what fits best for the client is very important. While previous solutions were able to accomplish this using a variety of mixed features of WCF and ASP.NET, Web API combines all this functionality into a single robust server side HTTP framework that intrinsically understands the HTTP semantics and subtly drives you in the right direction for most operations. And when you need to customize or do something that is not built in, there are lots of hooks and overrides for most behaviors, and even many low level hook points that allow you to plug in custom functionality with relatively little effort. No Brainers for Web API There are a few scenarios that are a slam dunk for Web API. If your primary focus of an application or even a part of an application is some sort of API then Web API makes great sense. HTTP ServicesIf you're building a comprehensive HTTP API that is to be consumed over the Web, Web API is a perfect fit. You can isolate the logic in Web API and build your application as a service breaking out the logic into controllers as needed. Because the primary interface is the service there's no confusion of what should go where (MVC or API). Perfect fit. Primary AJAX BackendsIf you're building rich client Web applications that are relying heavily on AJAX callbacks to serve its data, Web API is also a slam dunk. Again because much if not most of the business logic will probably end up in your Web API service logic, there's no confusion over where logic should go and there's no duplication. In Single Page Applications (SPA), typically there's very little HTML based logic served other than bringing up a shell UI and then filling the data from the server with AJAX which means the business logic required for data retrieval and data acceptance and validation too lives in the Web API. Perfect fit. Generic HTTP EndpointsAnother good fit are generic HTTP endpoints that to serve data or handle 'utility' type functionality in typical Web applications. If you need to implement an image server, or an upload handler in the past I'd implement that as an HTTP handler. With Web API you now have a well defined place where you can implement these types of generic 'services' in a location that can easily add endpoints (via Controller methods) or separated out as more full featured APIs. Granted this could be done with MVC as well, but Web API seems a clearer and more well defined place to store generic application services. This is one thing I used to do a lot of in my own libraries and Web API addresses this nicely. Great fit. Mixed HTML and AJAX Applications: Not a clear Choice  For all the commonality that Web API and MVC share they are fundamentally different platforms that are independent of each other. A lot of people have asked when does it make sense to use MVC vs. Web API when you're dealing with typical Web application that creates HTML and also uses AJAX functionality for rich functionality. While it's easy to say that all 'service'/AJAX logic should go into a Web API and all HTML related generation into MVC, that can often result in a lot of code duplication. Also MVC supports JSON and XML result data fairly easily as well so there's some confusion where that 'trigger point' is of when you should switch to Web API vs. just implementing functionality as part of MVC controllers. Ultimately there's a tradeoff between isolation of functionality and duplication. A good rule of thumb I think works is that if a large chunk of the application's functionality serves data Web API is a good choice, but if you have a couple of small AJAX requests to serve data to a grid or autocomplete box it'd be overkill to separate out that logic into a separate Web API controller. Web API does add overhead to your application (it's yet another framework that sits on top of core ASP.NET) so it should be worth it .Keep in mind that MVC can generate HTML and JSON/XML and just about any other content easily and that functionality is not going away, so just because you Web API is there it doesn't mean you have to use it. Web API is not a full replacement for MVC obviously either since there's not the same level of support to feed HTML from Web API controllers (although you can host a RazorEngine easily enough if you really want to go that route) so if you're HTML is part of your API or application in general MVC is still a better choice either alone or in combination with Web API. I suspect (and hope) that in the future Web API's functionality will merge even closer with MVC so that you might even be able to mix functionality of both into single Controllers so that you don't have to make any trade offs, but at the moment that's not the case. Some Issues To think about Web API is similar to MVC but not the Same Although Web API looks a lot like MVC it's not the same and some common functionality of MVC behaves differently in Web API. For example, the way single POST variables are handled is different than MVC and doesn't lend itself particularly well to some AJAX scenarios with POST data. Code Duplication I already touched on this in the Mixed HTML and Web API section, but if you build an MVC application that also exposes a Web API it's quite likely that you end up duplicating a bunch of code and - potentially - infrastructure. You may have to create authentication logic both for an HTML application and for the Web API which might need something different altogether. More often than not though the same logic is used, and there's no easy way to share. If you implement an MVC ActionFilter and you want that same functionality in your Web API you'll end up creating the filter twice. AJAX Data or AJAX HTML On a recent post's comments, David made some really good points regarding the commonality of MVC and Web API's and its place. One comment that caught my eye was a little more generic, regarding data services vs. HTML services. David says: I see a lot of merit in the combination of Knockout.js, client side templates and view models, calling Web API for a responsive UI, but sometimes late at night that still leaves me wondering why I would no longer be using some of the nice tooling and features that have evolved in MVC ;-) You know what - I can totally relate to that. On the last Web based mobile app I worked on, we decided to serve HTML partials to the client via AJAX for many (but not all!) things, rather than sending down raw data to inject into the DOM on the client via templating or direct manipulation. While there are definitely more bytes on the wire, with this, the overhead ended up being actually fairly small if you keep the 'data' requests small and atomic. Performance was often made up by the lack of client side rendering of HTML. Server rendered HTML for AJAX templating gives so much better infrastructure support without having to screw around with 20 mismatched client libraries. Especially with MVC and partials it's pretty easy to break out your HTML logic into very small, atomic chunks, so it's actually easy to create small rendering islands that can be used via composition on the server, or via AJAX calls to small, tight partials that return HTML to the client. Although this is often frowned upon as to 'heavy', it worked really well in terms of developer effort as well as providing surprisingly good performance on devices. There's still plenty of jQuery and AJAX logic happening on the client but it's more manageable in small doses rather than trying to do the entire UI composition with JavaScript and/or 'not-quite-there-yet' template engines that are very difficult to debug. This is not an issue directly related to Web API of course, but something to think about especially for AJAX or SPA style applications. Summary Web API is a great new addition to the ASP.NET platform and it addresses a serious need for consolidation of a lot of half-baked HTTP service API technologies that came before it. Web API feels 'right', and hits the right combination of usability and flexibility at least for me and it's a good fit for true API scenarios. However, just because a new platform is available it doesn't meant that other tools or tech that came before it should be discarded or even upgraded to the new platform. There's nothing wrong with continuing to use MVC controller methods to handle API tasks if that's what your app is running now - there's very little to be gained by upgrading to Web API just because. But going forward Web API clearly is the way to go, when building HTTP data interfaces and it's good to see that Microsoft got this one right - it was sorely needed! Resources ASP.NET Web API AspConf Ask the Experts Session (first 5 minutes) © Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in Web Api   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

  • Do I lose anything by coding in c# and using free online vb.net code convertors?

    - by Gullu
    The company I work for uses vb.net since there are many programmers who moved up from vb6 to vb.net. Basically more vb.net resources in the company for support/maintenance vs c#. I am a c# coder and was wondering if I could just continue coding in c# and just use the many online free c# to vb.net code convertors. That way, I will be more productive and also be more marketable since there are more c# jobs compared to vb.net jobs. I have done vb6 many years ago and I am comfortable debugging vb.net code. It's just the primary coding language. I am more comfortable in c#. Will I lose anything if I use this approach. (code conversion). Based on what i read online the future of vb.net is really "Dim". Please advise. thank you

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62  | Next Page >