Search Results

Search found 9325 results on 373 pages for 'mvc 2'.

Page 8/373 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • ASP.NET MVC - Views location Problem : The view 'Index' or its master was not found

    - by user326873
    Hi all, I've create an asp.net MVC 2 project, it works fine!! I've been asked to integrate the project in an existing web project in classic asp.net (I've add the folder containing the source, and not make a new project, because they have to bee in same project) I've configured my web.config file <pages pageBaseType="System.Web.UI.Page" > <controls> <add tagPrefix="asp" namespace="System.Web.UI" assembly="System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> <add tagPrefix="asp" namespace="System.Web.UI.WebControls" assembly="System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> </controls> <namespaces> <add namespace="System.Web.Mvc" /> <add namespace="System.Web.Mvc.Ajax" /> <add namespace="System.Web.Mvc.Html" /> <add namespace="System.Web.Routing" /> <add namespace="System.Linq" /> <add namespace="System.Collections.Generic" /> <add namespace="SearchApp.Helpers.CheckBoxList"/> <add namespace="SearchApp.Helpers.Pager"/> </namespaces> </pages> <httpModules> <add name="ScriptModule" type="System.Web.Handlers.ScriptModule, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> <add name="UrlRoutingModule" type="System.Web.Routing.UrlRoutingModule, System.Web.Routing, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> </httpModules> <!--- END MVC config section--> and my global.asax file (I'm working under IIS 5.1) : public static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes) { routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}"); routes.MapRoute( "SearchApp", // Route name "SearchApp/{controller}.aspx/{action}/{id}", // URL with parameters new { controller = "Search", action = "Index", id = "" } // Parameter defaults ); } protected void Application_Start(Object sender, EventArgs e) { AreaRegistration.RegisterAllAreas(); RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes); } The hierarchy of the project is (I can’t find how to insert Image in the post): +Project ++MVC2AppFolder +++Controller ++++SearchController.cs +++Views ++++Search +++++Index.aspx ++global.asax ++web.config as you can see the global.asax is not in the MVC App folder when I try to access the page Search/index.aspx using this url http://localhost/cstfwsrv/SearchApp/Search.aspx/Index[^] have the following error : I The view 'Index' or its master was not found. The following locations were searched: ~/Views/Search/Index.aspx ~/Views/Search/Index.ascx ~/Views/Shared/Index.aspx ~/Views/Shared/Index.ascx Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code. Exception Details: System.InvalidOperationException: The view 'Index' or its master was not found. The following locations were searched: ~/Views/Search/Index.aspx ~/Views/Search/Index.ascx ~/Views/Shared/Index.aspx ~/Views/Shared/Index.ascx Source Error: An unhandled exception was generated during the execution of the current web request. Information regarding the origin and location of the exception can be identified using the exception stack trace below. Stack Trace: [InvalidOperationException: The view 'Index' or its master was not found. The following locations were searched: ~/Views/Search/Index.aspx ~/Views/Search/Index.ascx ~/Views/Shared/Index.aspx ~/Views/Shared/Index.ascx] System.Web.Mvc.ViewResult.FindView(ControllerContext context) +253553 System.Web.Mvc.ViewResultBase.ExecuteResult(ControllerContext context) +139 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeActionResult(ControllerContext controllerContext, ActionResult actionResult) +10 System.Web.Mvc.<>c__DisplayClass14.<InvokeActionResultWithFilters>b__11() +20 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeActionResultFilter(IResultFilter filter, ResultExecutingContext preContext, Func`1 continuation) +251 System.Web.Mvc.<>c__DisplayClass16.<InvokeActionResultWithFilters>b__13() +19 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeActionResultWithFilters(ControllerContext controllerContext, IList`1 filters, ActionResult actionResult) +178 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeAction(ControllerContext controllerContext, String actionName) +314 System.Web.Mvc.Controller.ExecuteCore() +105 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerBase.Execute(RequestContext requestContext) +39 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerBase.System.Web.Mvc.IController.Execute(RequestContext requestContext) +7 System.Web.Mvc.<>c__DisplayClass8.<BeginProcessRequest>b__4() +34 System.Web.Mvc.Async.<>c__DisplayClass1.<MakeVoidDelegate>b__0() +21 System.Web.Mvc.Async.<>c__DisplayClass8`1.<BeginSynchronous>b__7(IAsyncResult _) +12 System.Web.Mvc.Async.WrappedAsyncResult`1.End() +59 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.EndProcessRequest(IAsyncResult asyncResult) +44 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.System.Web.IHttpAsyncHandler.EndProcessRequest(IAsyncResult result) +7 System.Web.CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication.IExecutionStep.Execute() +8677678 System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously) +155 As you can see he search for the Index.aspx page under ~/Views/Search/Index.aspx , wich is under ~/MVC2AppFolder/Views/Search/Index.aspx Is there a way to set in the Route Method, or any where else, the View Path? Thanks’ in advance

    Read the article

  • C# MVC: User Password Reset Controller: Issues with email addresses as usernames

    - by 109221793
    Hi guys, I have written the code below for resetting users passwords (am using the aspnet membership api) in an C# MVC application, and tested successfully on a sample tutorial application (MVC Music Store). Skip to the end if you wish to read problem description first. InactiveUsers View (Partial View) <%@ Control Language="C#" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewUserControl<System.Web.Security.MembershipUserCollection>" %> <table class="normal" style="width: 100%; background-color: White;"> <tr> <th>User Name</th> <th>Last Activity date</th> <th>Locked Out</th> </tr> <%foreach (MembershipUser user in Model){ %> <tr> <td><%: Html.RouteLink(user.UserName, "AdminPassword", new { username = user.UserName }) %></td> <td><%: user.LastActivityDate %></td> <td><%: user.IsLockedOut %></td> </tr> <% }%> </table> InactiveUsers Controller public ActionResult InactiveUsers() { var users = Membership.GetAllUsers(); return View(users); } changeUserPassword GET and POST Controllers public ActionResult changeUserPassword(string username) { ViewData["username"] = username; return View(); } [HttpPost] public ActionResult changeUserPassword(ChangePasswordModel model, FormCollection values) { string username = values["username"]; string password = values["password"]; string confirmPassword = values["confirmPassword"]; MembershipUser mu = Membership.GetUser(username); if (password == confirmPassword) { if (mu.ChangePassword(mu.ResetPassword(), password)) { return RedirectToAction("Index", "ControlPanel"); } else { ModelState.AddModelError("", "The current password does not meet requirements"); } } return View(); } I also modified the Global.asax.cs file to cater for my route in the InactiveUsers partial: // Added in 10/01/11 RouteTable.Routes.MapRoute( "AdminPassword", // routename "ControlPanel/changeUserPassword/{username}", new { controller = "ControlPanel", action = "changeUserPassword", username = UrlParameter.Optional } ); // END Now, when I tested on the MVC Music Store, all of my usernames were just words, e.g. Administrator, User, etc. However now I am applying this code to a situation in my workplace and it's not working out quite as planned. The usernames used in my workplace are actually email addresses and I think this is what is causing the problem. When I click on the RouteLink in the partial InactiveUsers view, it should bring me to the reset password page with a url that looks like this: http://localhost:83/ControlPanel/changeUserPassword/[email protected], HOWEVER, what happens when I click on the RouteLink is an error is thrown to say that the view changeUserPassword cannot be found, and the URL looks like this: http://localhost:83/ControlPanel/changeUserPassword/example1%40gmail.com - See how the '@' symbol gets messed up? I've also debugged through the code, and in my GET changeUserPassword, the username is populating correctly: [email protected], so I'm thinking it's just the URL that's messing it up? If I type in the URL manually, the changeUserPassword view displays, however the password reset function does not work. An 'Object reference not set to an instance of an object' exception is thrown at the if (mu.ChangePassword(mu.ResetPassword(), password)) line. I think if I could solve the first issue (URL '@' symbol problem) it might help me along with my second issue. Any help would be appreciated :) Stack Trace - as requested Source Error: An unhandled exception was generated during the execution of the current web request. Information regarding the origin and location of the exception can be identified using the exception stack trace below. Stack Trace: [InvalidOperationException: The view 'changeUserPassword' or its master was not found. The following locations were searched: ~/Views/ControlPanel/changeUserPassword.aspx ~/Views/ControlPanel/changeUserPassword.ascx ~/Views/Shared/changeUserPassword.aspx ~/Views/Shared/changeUserPassword.ascx] System.Web.Mvc.ViewResult.FindView(ControllerContext context) +495 System.Web.Mvc.ViewResultBase.ExecuteResult(ControllerContext context) +208 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeActionResult(ControllerContext controllerContext, ActionResult actionResult) +39 System.Web.Mvc.<>c__DisplayClass14.<InvokeActionResultWithFilters>b__11() +60 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeActionResultFilter(IResultFilter filter, ResultExecutingContext preContext, Func`1 continuation) +391 System.Web.Mvc.<>c__DisplayClass16.<InvokeActionResultWithFilters>b__13() +61 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeActionResultWithFilters(ControllerContext controllerContext, IList`1 filters, ActionResult actionResult) +285 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeAction(ControllerContext controllerContext, String actionName) +830 System.Web.Mvc.Controller.ExecuteCore() +136 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerBase.Execute(RequestContext requestContext) +111 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerBase.System.Web.Mvc.IController.Execute(RequestContext requestContext) +39 System.Web.Mvc.<>c__DisplayClass8.<BeginProcessRequest>b__4() +65 System.Web.Mvc.Async.<>c__DisplayClass1.<MakeVoidDelegate>b__0() +44 System.Web.Mvc.Async.<>c__DisplayClass8`1.<BeginSynchronous>b__7(IAsyncResult _) +42 System.Web.Mvc.Async.WrappedAsyncResult`1.End() +141 System.Web.Mvc.Async.AsyncResultWrapper.End(IAsyncResult asyncResult, Object tag) +54 System.Web.Mvc.Async.AsyncResultWrapper.End(IAsyncResult asyncResult, Object tag) +40 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.EndProcessRequest(IAsyncResult asyncResult) +52 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.System.Web.IHttpAsyncHandler.EndProcessRequest(IAsyncResult result) +38 System.Web.CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication.IExecutionStep.Execute() +8841105 System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously) +184

    Read the article

  • Spring 3.0 MVC mvc:view-controller tag

    - by gouki
    Here's a snippet of my mvc-config.xml <bean class="org.springframework.web.servlet.view.InternalResourceViewResolver"> <property name="prefix" value="/WEB-INF/views/"/> <property name="suffix" value=".jsp"/> </bean> <mvc:view-controller path="/index" view-name="welcome"/> <mvc:view-controller path="/static/login" view-name="/static/login"/> <mvc:view-controller path="/login" view-name="/static/login"/> I have the welcome.jsp on /WEB-INF/view/ directory and login.jsp on /WEB-INF/view/static/. This work for '/index' and '/login' paths. But I'm getting 404 response for '/static/login' when invoked from the browser. I'm expecting that '/static/login/' and '/login' should behave the same. What could be wrong here? Would appreciate any help. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • SimpleMembership, Membership Providers, Universal Providers and the new ASP.NET 4.5 Web Forms and ASP.NET MVC 4 templates

    - by Jon Galloway
    The ASP.NET MVC 4 Internet template adds some new, very useful features which are built on top of SimpleMembership. These changes add some great features, like a much simpler and extensible membership API and support for OAuth. However, the new account management features require SimpleMembership and won't work against existing ASP.NET Membership Providers. I'll start with a summary of top things you need to know, then dig into a lot more detail. Summary: SimpleMembership has been designed as a replacement for traditional the previous ASP.NET Role and Membership provider system SimpleMembership solves common problems people ran into with the Membership provider system and was designed for modern user / membership / storage needs SimpleMembership integrates with the previous membership system, but you can't use a MembershipProvider with SimpleMembership The new ASP.NET MVC 4 Internet application template AccountController requires SimpleMembership and is not compatible with previous MembershipProviders You can continue to use existing ASP.NET Role and Membership providers in ASP.NET 4.5 and ASP.NET MVC 4 - just not with the ASP.NET MVC 4 AccountController The existing ASP.NET Role and Membership provider system remains supported as is part of the ASP.NET core ASP.NET 4.5 Web Forms does not use SimpleMembership; it implements OAuth on top of ASP.NET Membership The ASP.NET Web Site Administration Tool (WSAT) is not compatible with SimpleMembership The following is the result of a few conversations with Erik Porter (PM for ASP.NET MVC) to make sure I had some the overall details straight, combined with a lot of time digging around in ILSpy and Visual Studio's assembly browsing tools. SimpleMembership: The future of membership for ASP.NET The ASP.NET Membership system was introduces with ASP.NET 2.0 back in 2005. It was designed to solve common site membership requirements at the time, which generally involved username / password based registration and profile storage in SQL Server. It was designed with a few extensibility mechanisms - notably a provider system (which allowed you override some specifics like backing storage) and the ability to store additional profile information (although the additional  profile information was packed into a single column which usually required access through the API). While it's sometimes frustrating to work with, it's held up for seven years - probably since it handles the main use case (username / password based membership in a SQL Server database) smoothly and can be adapted to most other needs (again, often frustrating, but it can work). The ASP.NET Web Pages and WebMatrix efforts allowed the team an opportunity to take a new look at a lot of things - e.g. the Razor syntax started with ASP.NET Web Pages, not ASP.NET MVC. The ASP.NET Web Pages team designed SimpleMembership to (wait for it) simplify the task of dealing with membership. As Matthew Osborn said in his post Using SimpleMembership With ASP.NET WebPages: With the introduction of ASP.NET WebPages and the WebMatrix stack our team has really be focusing on making things simpler for the developer. Based on a lot of customer feedback one of the areas that we wanted to improve was the built in security in ASP.NET. So with this release we took that time to create a new built in (and default for ASP.NET WebPages) security provider. I say provider because the new stuff is still built on the existing ASP.NET framework. So what do we call this new hotness that we have created? Well, none other than SimpleMembership. SimpleMembership is an umbrella term for both SimpleMembership and SimpleRoles. Part of simplifying membership involved fixing some common problems with ASP.NET Membership. Problems with ASP.NET Membership ASP.NET Membership was very obviously designed around a set of assumptions: Users and user information would most likely be stored in a full SQL Server database or in Active Directory User and profile information would be optimized around a set of common attributes (UserName, Password, IsApproved, CreationDate, Comment, Role membership...) and other user profile information would be accessed through a profile provider Some problems fall out of these assumptions. Requires Full SQL Server for default cases The default, and most fully featured providers ASP.NET Membership providers (SQL Membership Provider, SQL Role Provider, SQL Profile Provider) require full SQL Server. They depend on stored procedure support, and they rely on SQL Server cache dependencies, they depend on agents for clean up and maintenance. So the main SQL Server based providers don't work well on SQL Server CE, won't work out of the box on SQL Azure, etc. Note: Cory Fowler recently let me know about these Updated ASP.net scripts for use with Microsoft SQL Azure which do support membership, personalization, profile, and roles. But the fact that we need a support page with a set of separate SQL scripts underscores the underlying problem. Aha, you say! Jon's forgetting the Universal Providers, a.k.a. System.Web.Providers! Hold on a bit, we'll get to those... Custom Membership Providers have to work with a SQL-Server-centric API If you want to work with another database or other membership storage system, you need to to inherit from the provider base classes and override a bunch of methods which are tightly focused on storing a MembershipUser in a relational database. It can be done (and you can often find pretty good ones that have already been written), but it's a good amount of work and often leaves you with ugly code that has a bunch of System.NotImplementedException fun since there are a lot of methods that just don't apply. Designed around a specific view of users, roles and profiles The existing providers are focused on traditional membership - a user has a username and a password, some specific roles on the site (e.g. administrator, premium user), and may have some additional "nice to have" optional information that can be accessed via an API in your application. This doesn't fit well with some modern usage patterns: In OAuth and OpenID, the user doesn't have a password Often these kinds of scenarios map better to user claims or rights instead of monolithic user roles For many sites, profile or other non-traditional information is very important and needs to come from somewhere other than an API call that maps to a database blob What would work a lot better here is a system in which you were able to define your users, rights, and other attributes however you wanted and the membership system worked with your model - not the other way around. Requires specific schema, overflow in blob columns I've already mentioned this a few times, but it bears calling out separately - ASP.NET Membership focuses on SQL Server storage, and that storage is based on a very specific database schema. SimpleMembership as a better membership system As you might have guessed, SimpleMembership was designed to address the above problems. Works with your Schema As Matthew Osborn explains in his Using SimpleMembership With ASP.NET WebPages post, SimpleMembership is designed to integrate with your database schema: All SimpleMembership requires is that there are two columns on your users table so that we can hook up to it – an “ID” column and a “username” column. The important part here is that they can be named whatever you want. For instance username doesn't have to be an alias it could be an email column you just have to tell SimpleMembership to treat that as the “username” used to log in. Matthew's example shows using a very simple user table named Users (it could be named anything) with a UserID and Username column, then a bunch of other columns he wanted in his app. Then we point SimpleMemberhip at that table with a one-liner: WebSecurity.InitializeDatabaseFile("SecurityDemo.sdf", "Users", "UserID", "Username", true); No other tables are needed, the table can be named anything we want, and can have pretty much any schema we want as long as we've got an ID and something that we can map to a username. Broaden database support to the whole SQL Server family While SimpleMembership is not database agnostic, it works across the SQL Server family. It continues to support full SQL Server, but it also works with SQL Azure, SQL Server CE, SQL Server Express, and LocalDB. Everything's implemented as SQL calls rather than requiring stored procedures, views, agents, and change notifications. Note that SimpleMembership still requires some flavor of SQL Server - it won't work with MySQL, NoSQL databases, etc. You can take a look at the code in WebMatrix.WebData.dll using a tool like ILSpy if you'd like to see why - there places where SQL Server specific SQL statements are being executed, especially when creating and initializing tables. It seems like you might be able to work with another database if you created the tables separately, but I haven't tried it and it's not supported at this point. Note: I'm thinking it would be possible for SimpleMembership (or something compatible) to run Entity Framework so it would work with any database EF supports. That seems useful to me - thoughts? Note: SimpleMembership has the same database support - anything in the SQL Server family - that Universal Providers brings to the ASP.NET Membership system. Easy to with Entity Framework Code First The problem with with ASP.NET Membership's system for storing additional account information is that it's the gate keeper. That means you're stuck with its schema and accessing profile information through its API. SimpleMembership flips that around by allowing you to use any table as a user store. That means you're in control of the user profile information, and you can access it however you'd like - it's just data. Let's look at a practical based on the AccountModel.cs class in an ASP.NET MVC 4 Internet project. Here I'm adding a Birthday property to the UserProfile class. [Table("UserProfile")] public class UserProfile { [Key] [DatabaseGeneratedAttribute(DatabaseGeneratedOption.Identity)] public int UserId { get; set; } public string UserName { get; set; } public DateTime Birthday { get; set; } } Now if I want to access that information, I can just grab the account by username and read the value. var context = new UsersContext(); var username = User.Identity.Name; var user = context.UserProfiles.SingleOrDefault(u => u.UserName == username); var birthday = user.Birthday; So instead of thinking of SimpleMembership as a big membership API, think of it as something that handles membership based on your user database. In SimpleMembership, everything's keyed off a user row in a table you define rather than a bunch of entries in membership tables that were out of your control. How SimpleMembership integrates with ASP.NET Membership Okay, enough sales pitch (and hopefully background) on why things have changed. How does this affect you? Let's start with a diagram to show the relationship (note: I've simplified by removing a few classes to show the important relationships): So SimpleMembershipProvider is an implementaiton of an ExtendedMembershipProvider, which inherits from MembershipProvider and adds some other account / OAuth related things. Here's what ExtendedMembershipProvider adds to MembershipProvider: The important thing to take away here is that a SimpleMembershipProvider is a MembershipProvider, but a MembershipProvider is not a SimpleMembershipProvider. This distinction is important in practice: you cannot use an existing MembershipProvider (including the Universal Providers found in System.Web.Providers) with an API that requires a SimpleMembershipProvider, including any of the calls in WebMatrix.WebData.WebSecurity or Microsoft.Web.WebPages.OAuth.OAuthWebSecurity. However, that's as far as it goes. Membership Providers still work if you're accessing them through the standard Membership API, and all of the core stuff  - including the AuthorizeAttribute, role enforcement, etc. - will work just fine and without any change. Let's look at how that affects you in terms of the new templates. Membership in the ASP.NET MVC 4 project templates ASP.NET MVC 4 offers six Project Templates: Empty - Really empty, just the assemblies, folder structure and a tiny bit of basic configuration. Basic - Like Empty, but with a bit of UI preconfigured (css / images / bundling). Internet - This has both a Home and Account controller and associated views. The Account Controller supports registration and login via either local accounts and via OAuth / OpenID providers. Intranet - Like the Internet template, but it's preconfigured for Windows Authentication. Mobile - This is preconfigured using jQuery Mobile and is intended for mobile-only sites. Web API - This is preconfigured for a service backend built on ASP.NET Web API. Out of these templates, only one (the Internet template) uses SimpleMembership. ASP.NET MVC 4 Basic template The Basic template has configuration in place to use ASP.NET Membership with the Universal Providers. You can see that configuration in the ASP.NET MVC 4 Basic template's web.config: <profile defaultProvider="DefaultProfileProvider"> <providers> <add name="DefaultProfileProvider" type="System.Web.Providers.DefaultProfileProvider, System.Web.Providers, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" connectionStringName="DefaultConnection" applicationName="/" /> </providers> </profile> <membership defaultProvider="DefaultMembershipProvider"> <providers> <add name="DefaultMembershipProvider" type="System.Web.Providers.DefaultMembershipProvider, System.Web.Providers, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" connectionStringName="DefaultConnection" enablePasswordRetrieval="false" enablePasswordReset="true" requiresQuestionAndAnswer="false" requiresUniqueEmail="false" maxInvalidPasswordAttempts="5" minRequiredPasswordLength="6" minRequiredNonalphanumericCharacters="0" passwordAttemptWindow="10" applicationName="/" /> </providers> </membership> <roleManager defaultProvider="DefaultRoleProvider"> <providers> <add name="DefaultRoleProvider" type="System.Web.Providers.DefaultRoleProvider, System.Web.Providers, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" connectionStringName="DefaultConnection" applicationName="/" /> </providers> </roleManager> <sessionState mode="InProc" customProvider="DefaultSessionProvider"> <providers> <add name="DefaultSessionProvider" type="System.Web.Providers.DefaultSessionStateProvider, System.Web.Providers, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31bf3856ad364e35" connectionStringName="DefaultConnection" /> </providers> </sessionState> This means that it's business as usual for the Basic template as far as ASP.NET Membership works. ASP.NET MVC 4 Internet template The Internet template has a few things set up to bootstrap SimpleMembership: \Models\AccountModels.cs defines a basic user account and includes data annotations to define keys and such \Filters\InitializeSimpleMembershipAttribute.cs creates the membership database using the above model, then calls WebSecurity.InitializeDatabaseConnection which verifies that the underlying tables are in place and marks initialization as complete (for the application's lifetime) \Controllers\AccountController.cs makes heavy use of OAuthWebSecurity (for OAuth account registration / login / management) and WebSecurity. WebSecurity provides account management services for ASP.NET MVC (and Web Pages) WebSecurity can work with any ExtendedMembershipProvider. There's one in the box (SimpleMembershipProvider) but you can write your own. Since a standard MembershipProvider is not an ExtendedMembershipProvider, WebSecurity will throw exceptions if the default membership provider is a MembershipProvider rather than an ExtendedMembershipProvider. Practical example: Create a new ASP.NET MVC 4 application using the Internet application template Install the Microsoft ASP.NET Universal Providers for LocalDB NuGet package Run the application, click on Register, add a username and password, and click submit You'll get the following execption in AccountController.cs::Register: To call this method, the "Membership.Provider" property must be an instance of "ExtendedMembershipProvider". This occurs because the ASP.NET Universal Providers packages include a web.config transform that will update your web.config to add the Universal Provider configuration I showed in the Basic template example above. When WebSecurity tries to use the configured ASP.NET Membership Provider, it checks if it can be cast to an ExtendedMembershipProvider before doing anything else. So, what do you do? Options: If you want to use the new AccountController, you'll either need to use the SimpleMembershipProvider or another valid ExtendedMembershipProvider. This is pretty straightforward. If you want to use an existing ASP.NET Membership Provider in ASP.NET MVC 4, you can't use the new AccountController. You can do a few things: Replace  the AccountController.cs and AccountModels.cs in an ASP.NET MVC 4 Internet project with one from an ASP.NET MVC 3 application (you of course won't have OAuth support). Then, if you want, you can go through and remove other things that were built around SimpleMembership - the OAuth partial view, the NuGet packages (e.g. the DotNetOpenAuthAuth package, etc.) Use an ASP.NET MVC 4 Internet application template and add in a Universal Providers NuGet package. Then copy in the AccountController and AccountModel classes. Create an ASP.NET MVC 3 project and upgrade it to ASP.NET MVC 4 using the steps shown in the ASP.NET MVC 4 release notes. None of these are particularly elegant or simple. Maybe we (or just me?) can do something to make this simpler - perhaps a NuGet package. However, this should be an edge case - hopefully the cases where you'd need to create a new ASP.NET but use legacy ASP.NET Membership Providers should be pretty rare. Please let me (or, preferably the team) know if that's an incorrect assumption. Membership in the ASP.NET 4.5 project template ASP.NET 4.5 Web Forms took a different approach which builds off ASP.NET Membership. Instead of using the WebMatrix security assemblies, Web Forms uses Microsoft.AspNet.Membership.OpenAuth assembly. I'm no expert on this, but from a bit of time in ILSpy and Visual Studio's (very pretty) dependency graphs, this uses a Membership Adapter to save OAuth data into an EF managed database while still running on top of ASP.NET Membership. Note: There may be a way to use this in ASP.NET MVC 4, although it would probably take some plumbing work to hook it up. How does this fit in with Universal Providers (System.Web.Providers)? Just to summarize: Universal Providers are intended for cases where you have an existing ASP.NET Membership Provider and you want to use it with another SQL Server database backend (other than SQL Server). It doesn't require agents to handle expired session cleanup and other background tasks, it piggybacks these tasks on other calls. Universal Providers are not really, strictly speaking, universal - at least to my way of thinking. They only work with databases in the SQL Server family. Universal Providers do not work with Simple Membership. The Universal Providers packages include some web config transforms which you would normally want when you're using them. What about the Web Site Administration Tool? Visual Studio includes tooling to launch the Web Site Administration Tool (WSAT) to configure users and roles in your application. WSAT is built to work with ASP.NET Membership, and is not compatible with Simple Membership. There are two main options there: Use the WebSecurity and OAuthWebSecurity API to manage the users and roles Create a web admin using the above APIs Since SimpleMembership runs on top of your database, you can update your users as you would any other data - via EF or even in direct database edits (in development, of course)

    Read the article

  • Looking into ASP.Net MVC 4.0 Mobile Development - part 2

    - by nikolaosk
    In this post I will be continuing my discussion on ASP.Net MVC 4.0 mobile development. You can have a look at my first post on the subject here . Make sure you read it and understand it well before you move one reading the remaining of this post. I will not be writing any code in this post. I will try to explain a few concepts related to the MVC 4.0 mobile functionality. In this post I will be looking into the Browser Overriding feature in ASP.Net MVC 4.0. By that I mean that we override the user agent for a given user session. This is very useful feature for people who visit a site through a device and they experience the mobile version of the site, but what they really want is the option to be able to switch to the desktop view. "Why they might want to do that?", you might wonder.Well first of all the users of our ASP.Net MVC 4.0 application will appreciate that they have the option to switch views while some others will think that they will enjoy more the contents of our website with the "desktop view" since the mobile device they view our site has a quite large display.  Obviously this is only one site. These are just different views that are rendered.To put it simply, browser overriding lets our application treat requests as if they were coming from a different browser rather than the one they are actually from. In order to do that programmatically we must have a look at the System.Web.WebPages namespace and the classes in it. Most specifically the class BrowserHelpers. Have a look at the picture below   In this class we see some extension methods for HttpContext class.These methods are called extensions-helpers methods and we use them to switch to one browser from another thus overriding the current/actual browser. These APIs have effect on layout,views and partial views and will not affect any other ASP.Net Request.Browser related functionality.The overridden browser is stored in a cookie. Let me explain what some of these methods do. SetOverriddenBrowser() -  let us set the user agent string to specific value GetOverriddenBrowser() -  let us get the overridden value ClearOverriddenBrowser() -  let us remove any overridden user agent for the current request   To recap, in our ASP.Net MVC 4.0 applications when our application is viewed in our mobile devices, we can have a link like "Desktop View" for all those who desperately want to see the site with in full desktop-browser version.We then can specify a browser type override. My controller class (snippet of code) that is responsible for handling the switching could be something like that. public class SwitchViewController : Controller{ public RedirectResult SwitchView(bool mobile, string returnUrl){if (Request.Browser.IsMobileDevice == mobile)HttpContext.ClearOverriddenBrowser();elseHttpContext.SetOverriddenBrowser(mobile ? BrowserOverride.Mobile : BrowserOverride.Desktop);return Redirect(returnUrl);}} Hope it helps!!!!

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 4 async child action

    - by ShadowChaser
    I have an ASP.NET MVC 4 application targeting .NET 4.5. One of our child actions makes a call out to a web service using HttpClient. Since we're blocking on IO waiting for the HttpClient response, it makes a great deal of sense to convert the code to the async/await pattern. However, when MVC 4 attempts to execute the child action, we get the following error message: HttpServerUtility.Execute blocked while waiting for an asynchronous operation to complete. At first glance, it appears as though MVC 4 does not support async/await within a child action. The only remaining option is to run using synchronous code and force a "Wait" on the async task. As we all know, touching .Result or .Wait() on an async task in an ASP.NET context will cause an immediate deadlock. My async logic is wrapped in a class library, so I can't use the "await blah.ConfigureAwait(false)" trick. Remember, tagging "async" on the child action and using await causes an error, and that prevents me from configuring the await. I'm painted into a corner at this point. Is there any way to consume async methods in an MVC 4 child action? Seems like a flat out bug with no workarounds.

    Read the article

  • Newbie question about controllers in ASP.Net MVC.

    - by Sergio Tapia
    I'm following a tutorial on creating the NerdDinner using ASP.Net MVC. However, I'm using Visual Studio 2010 Ultimate edition and there was only MVC2 to choose from. So I've following the tutorial so far, and everything is really clicking and being really well explained, until this little hitch. The guide is asking me to create new methods on a Controller file like so: using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Web; using System.Web.Mvc; namespace NerdDinner.Controllers { public class DinnersController : Controller { public void Index(){ Response.Write("<h1>Coming Soon: Dinners</h1>"); } public void Details(int id) { Response.Write("<h1>Details DinnerID: " + id + "</h1>"); } } } However, when I created the Controllers file, Visual Studio created an Index method already, but it looks vastly different to what the tutorial shows. Maybe this is the new way to do things using MVC2? using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Web; using System.Web.Mvc; namespace NerdDinner.Controllers { public class DinnersController : Controller { // // GET: /Dinners/ public ActionResult Index() { return View(); } } } My question is, how can I reproduce the Details and Index method (they're in MVC) to the MVC2 way? Is this even relevant? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Developing web apps using ASP.NET MVC 3, Razor and EF Code First - Part 2

    - by shiju
    In my previous post Developing web apps using ASP.NET MVC 3, Razor and EF Code First - Part 1, we have discussed on how to work with ASP.NET MVC 3 and EF Code First for developing web apps. We have created generic repository and unit of work with EF Code First for our ASP.NET MVC 3 application and did basic CRUD operations against a simple domain entity. In this post, I will demonstrate on working with domain entity with deep object graph, Service Layer and View Models and will also complete the rest of the demo application. In the previous post, we have done CRUD operations against Category entity and this post will be focus on Expense entity those have an association with Category entity. You can download the source code from http://efmvc.codeplex.com . The following frameworks will be used for this step by step tutorial.    1. ASP.NET MVC 3 RTM    2. EF Code First CTP 5    3. Unity 2.0 Domain Model Category Entity public class Category   {       public int CategoryId { get; set; }       [Required(ErrorMessage = "Name Required")]       [StringLength(25, ErrorMessage = "Must be less than 25 characters")]       public string Name { get; set;}       public string Description { get; set; }       public virtual ICollection<Expense> Expenses { get; set; }   } Expense Entity public class Expense     {                public int ExpenseId { get; set; }                public string  Transaction { get; set; }         public DateTime Date { get; set; }         public double Amount { get; set; }         public int CategoryId { get; set; }         public virtual Category Category { get; set; }     } We have two domain entities - Category and Expense. A single category contains a list of expense transactions and every expense transaction should have a Category. Repository class for Expense Transaction Let’s create repository class for handling CRUD operations for Expense entity public class ExpenseRepository : RepositoryBase<Expense>, IExpenseRepository     {     public ExpenseRepository(IDatabaseFactory databaseFactory)         : base(databaseFactory)         {         }                } public interface IExpenseRepository : IRepository<Expense> { } Service Layer If you are new to Service Layer, checkout Martin Fowler's article Service Layer . According to Martin Fowler, Service Layer defines an application's boundary and its set of available operations from the perspective of interfacing client layers. It encapsulates the application's business logic, controlling transactions and coordinating responses in the implementation of its operations. Controller classes should be lightweight and do not put much of business logic onto it. We can use the service layer as the business logic layer and can encapsulate the rules of the application. Let’s create a Service class for coordinates the transaction for Expense public interface IExpenseService {     IEnumerable<Expense> GetExpenses(DateTime startDate, DateTime ednDate);     Expense GetExpense(int id);             void CreateExpense(Expense expense);     void DeleteExpense(int id);     void SaveExpense(); } public class ExpenseService : IExpenseService {     private readonly IExpenseRepository expenseRepository;            private readonly IUnitOfWork unitOfWork;     public ExpenseService(IExpenseRepository expenseRepository, IUnitOfWork unitOfWork)     {                  this.expenseRepository = expenseRepository;         this.unitOfWork = unitOfWork;     }     public IEnumerable<Expense> GetExpenses(DateTime startDate, DateTime endDate)     {         var expenses = expenseRepository.GetMany(exp => exp.Date >= startDate && exp.Date <= endDate);         return expenses;     }     public void CreateExpense(Expense expense)     {         expenseRepository.Add(expense);         unitOfWork.Commit();     }     public Expense GetExpense(int id)     {         var expense = expenseRepository.GetById(id);         return expense;     }     public void DeleteExpense(int id)     {         var expense = expenseRepository.GetById(id);         expenseRepository.Delete(expense);         unitOfWork.Commit();     }     public void SaveExpense()     {         unitOfWork.Commit();     } }   View Model for Expense Transactions In real world ASP.NET MVC applications, we need to design model objects especially for our views. Our domain objects are mainly designed for the needs for domain model and it is representing the domain of our applications. On the other hand, View Model objects are designed for our needs for views. We have an Expense domain entity that has an association with Category. While we are creating a new Expense, we have to specify that in which Category belongs with the new Expense transaction. The user interface for Expense transaction will have form fields for representing the Expense entity and a CategoryId for representing the Category. So let's create view model for representing the need for Expense transactions. public class ExpenseViewModel {     public int ExpenseId { get; set; }       [Required(ErrorMessage = "Category Required")]     public int CategoryId { get; set; }       [Required(ErrorMessage = "Transaction Required")]     public string Transaction { get; set; }       [Required(ErrorMessage = "Date Required")]     public DateTime Date { get; set; }       [Required(ErrorMessage = "Amount Required")]     public double Amount { get; set; }       public IEnumerable<SelectListItem> Category { get; set; } } The ExpenseViewModel is designed for the purpose of View template and contains the all validation rules. It has properties for mapping values to Expense entity and a property Category for binding values to a drop-down for list values of Category. Create Expense transaction Let’s create action methods in the ExpenseController for creating expense transactions public ActionResult Create() {     var expenseModel = new ExpenseViewModel();     var categories = categoryService.GetCategories();     expenseModel.Category = categories.ToSelectListItems(-1);     expenseModel.Date = DateTime.Today;     return View(expenseModel); } [HttpPost] public ActionResult Create(ExpenseViewModel expenseViewModel) {                      if (!ModelState.IsValid)         {             var categories = categoryService.GetCategories();             expenseViewModel.Category = categories.ToSelectListItems(expenseViewModel.CategoryId);             return View("Save", expenseViewModel);         }         Expense expense=new Expense();         ModelCopier.CopyModel(expenseViewModel,expense);         expenseService.CreateExpense(expense);         return RedirectToAction("Index");              } In the Create action method for HttpGet request, we have created an instance of our View Model ExpenseViewModel with Category information for the drop-down list and passing the Model object to View template. The extension method ToSelectListItems is shown below   public static IEnumerable<SelectListItem> ToSelectListItems(         this IEnumerable<Category> categories, int  selectedId) {     return           categories.OrderBy(category => category.Name)                 .Select(category =>                     new SelectListItem                     {                         Selected = (category.CategoryId == selectedId),                         Text = category.Name,                         Value = category.CategoryId.ToString()                     }); } In the Create action method for HttpPost, our view model object ExpenseViewModel will map with posted form input values. We need to create an instance of Expense for the persistence purpose. So we need to copy values from ExpenseViewModel object to Expense object. ASP.NET MVC futures assembly provides a static class ModelCopier that can use for copying values between Model objects. ModelCopier class has two static methods - CopyCollection and CopyModel.CopyCollection method will copy values between two collection objects and CopyModel will copy values between two model objects. We have used CopyModel method of ModelCopier class for copying values from expenseViewModel object to expense object. Finally we did a call to CreateExpense method of ExpenseService class for persisting new expense transaction. List Expense Transactions We want to list expense transactions based on a date range. So let’s create action method for filtering expense transactions with a specified date range. public ActionResult Index(DateTime? startDate, DateTime? endDate) {     //If date is not passed, take current month's first and last dte     DateTime dtNow;     dtNow = DateTime.Today;     if (!startDate.HasValue)     {         startDate = new DateTime(dtNow.Year, dtNow.Month, 1);         endDate = startDate.Value.AddMonths(1).AddDays(-1);     }     //take last date of start date's month, if end date is not passed     if (startDate.HasValue && !endDate.HasValue)     {         endDate = (new DateTime(startDate.Value.Year, startDate.Value.Month, 1)).AddMonths(1).AddDays(-1);     }     var expenses = expenseService.GetExpenses(startDate.Value ,endDate.Value);     //if request is Ajax will return partial view     if (Request.IsAjaxRequest())     {         return PartialView("ExpenseList", expenses);     }     //set start date and end date to ViewBag dictionary     ViewBag.StartDate = startDate.Value.ToShortDateString();     ViewBag.EndDate = endDate.Value.ToShortDateString();     //if request is not ajax     return View(expenses); } We are using the above Index Action method for both Ajax requests and normal requests. If there is a request for Ajax, we will call the PartialView ExpenseList. Razor Views for listing Expense information Let’s create view templates in Razor for showing list of Expense information ExpenseList.cshtml @model IEnumerable<MyFinance.Domain.Expense>   <table>         <tr>             <th>Actions</th>             <th>Category</th>             <th>                 Transaction             </th>             <th>                 Date             </th>             <th>                 Amount             </th>         </tr>       @foreach (var item in Model) {              <tr>             <td>                 @Html.ActionLink("Edit", "Edit",new { id = item.ExpenseId })                 @Ajax.ActionLink("Delete", "Delete", new { id = item.ExpenseId }, new AjaxOptions { Confirm = "Delete Expense?", HttpMethod = "Post", UpdateTargetId = "divExpenseList" })             </td>              <td>                 @item.Category.Name             </td>             <td>                 @item.Transaction             </td>             <td>                 @String.Format("{0:d}", item.Date)             </td>             <td>                 @String.Format("{0:F}", item.Amount)             </td>         </tr>          }       </table>     <p>         @Html.ActionLink("Create New Expense", "Create") |         @Html.ActionLink("Create New Category", "Create","Category")     </p> Index.cshtml @using MyFinance.Helpers; @model IEnumerable<MyFinance.Domain.Expense> @{     ViewBag.Title = "Index"; }    <h2>Expense List</h2>    <script src="@Url.Content("~/Scripts/jquery.unobtrusive-ajax.min.js")" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="@Url.Content("~/Scripts/jquery-ui.js")" type="text/javascript"></script> <script src="@Url.Content("~/Scripts/jquery.ui.datepicker.js")" type="text/javascript"></script> <link href="@Url.Content("~/Content/jquery-ui-1.8.6.custom.css")" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" />      @using (Ajax.BeginForm(new AjaxOptions{ UpdateTargetId="divExpenseList", HttpMethod="Get"})) {     <table>         <tr>         <td>         <div>           Start Date: @Html.TextBox("StartDate", Html.Encode(String.Format("{0:mm/dd/yyyy}", ViewData["StartDate"].ToString())), new { @class = "ui-datepicker" })         </div>         </td>         <td><div>            End Date: @Html.TextBox("EndDate", Html.Encode(String.Format("{0:mm/dd/yyyy}", ViewData["EndDate"].ToString())), new { @class = "ui-datepicker" })          </div></td>          <td> <input type="submit" value="Search By TransactionDate" /></td>         </tr>     </table>         }   <div id="divExpenseList">             @Html.Partial("ExpenseList", Model)     </div> <script type="text/javascript">     $().ready(function () {         $('.ui-datepicker').datepicker({             dateFormat: 'mm/dd/yy',             buttonImage: '@Url.Content("~/Content/calendar.gif")',             buttonImageOnly: true,             showOn: "button"         });     }); </script> Ajax search functionality using Ajax.BeginForm The search functionality of Index view is providing Ajax functionality using Ajax.BeginForm. The Ajax.BeginForm() method writes an opening <form> tag to the response. You can use this method in a using block. In that case, the method renders the closing </form> tag at the end of the using block and the form is submitted asynchronously by using JavaScript. The search functionality will call the Index Action method and this will return partial view ExpenseList for updating the search result. We want to update the response UI for the Ajax request onto divExpenseList element. So we have specified the UpdateTargetId as "divExpenseList" in the Ajax.BeginForm method. Add jQuery DatePicker Our search functionality is using a date range so we are providing two date pickers using jQuery datepicker. You need to add reference to the following JavaScript files to working with jQuery datepicker. jquery-ui.js jquery.ui.datepicker.js For theme support for datepicker, we can use a customized CSS class. In our example we have used a CSS file “jquery-ui-1.8.6.custom.css”. For more details about the datepicker component, visit jquery UI website at http://jqueryui.com/demos/datepicker . In the jQuery ready event, we have used following JavaScript function to initialize the UI element to show date picker. <script type="text/javascript">     $().ready(function () {         $('.ui-datepicker').datepicker({             dateFormat: 'mm/dd/yy',             buttonImage: '@Url.Content("~/Content/calendar.gif")',             buttonImageOnly: true,             showOn: "button"         });     }); </script>   Source Code You can download the source code from http://efmvc.codeplex.com/ . Summary In this two-part series, we have created a simple web application using ASP.NET MVC 3 RTM, Razor and EF Code First CTP 5. I have demonstrated patterns and practices  such as Dependency Injection, Repository pattern, Unit of Work, ViewModel and Service Layer. My primary objective was to demonstrate different practices and options for developing web apps using ASP.NET MVC 3 and EF Code First. You can implement these approaches in your own way for building web apps using ASP.NET MVC 3. I will refactor this demo app on later time.

    Read the article

  • S#arp Architecture 1.5 released

    - by AlecWhittington
    The past two weeks have been wonderful for me, spending 12 days on Oahu, Hawaii. Then followed up with the S#arp Architecture 1.5 release. It has been a short 4 months since taking over as the project lead and this is my first major milestone. With this release, we advance S# even more forward with the ASP.NET MVC 2 enhancements. What's is S#? Pronounced "Sharp Architecture," this is a solid architectural foundation for rapidly building maintainable web applications leveraging the ASP.NET MVC framework...(read more)

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC Postbacks and HtmlHelper Controls ignoring Model Changes

    - by Rick Strahl
    So here's a binding behavior in ASP.NET MVC that I didn't really get until today: HtmlHelpers controls (like .TextBoxFor() etc.) don't bind to model values on Postback, but rather get their value directly out of the POST buffer from ModelState. Effectively it looks like you can't change the display value of a control via model value updates on a Postback operation. To demonstrate here's an example. I have a small section in a document where I display an editable email address: This is what the form displays on a GET operation and as expected I get the email value displayed in both the textbox and plain value display below, which reflects the value in the mode. I added a plain text value to demonstrate the model value compared to what's rendered in the textbox. The relevant markup is the email address which needs to be manipulated via the model in the Controller code. Here's the Razor markup: <div class="fieldcontainer"> <label> Email: &nbsp; <small>(username and <a href="http://gravatar.com">Gravatar</a> image)</small> </label> <div> @Html.TextBoxFor( mod=> mod.User.Email, new {type="email",@class="inputfield"}) @Model.User.Email </div> </div>   So, I have this form and the user can change their email address. On postback the Post controller code then asks the business layer whether the change is allowed. If it's not I want to reset the email address back to the old value which exists in the database and was previously store. The obvious thing to do would be to modify the model. Here's the Controller logic block that deals with that:// did user change email? if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(oldEmail) && user.Email != oldEmail) { if (userBus.DoesEmailExist(user.Email)) { userBus.ValidationErrors.Add("New email address exists already. Please…"); user.Email = oldEmail; } else // allow email change but require verification by forcing a login user.IsVerified = false; }… model.user = user; return View(model); The logic is straight forward - if the new email address is not valid because it already exists I don't want to display the new email address the user entered, but rather the old one. To do this I change the value on the model which effectively does this:model.user.Email = oldEmail; return View(model); So when I press the Save button after entering in my new email address ([email protected]) here's what comes back in the rendered view: Notice that the textbox value and the raw displayed model value are different. The TextBox displays the POST value, the raw value displays the actual model value which are different. This means that MVC renders the textbox value from the POST data rather than from the view data when an Http POST is active. Now I don't know about you but this is not the behavior I expected - initially. This behavior effectively means that I cannot modify the contents of the textbox from the Controller code if using HtmlHelpers for binding. Updating the model for display purposes in a POST has in effect - no effect. (Apr. 25, 2012 - edited the post heavily based on comments and more experimentation) What should the behavior be? After getting quite a few comments on this post I quickly realized that the behavior I described above is actually the behavior you'd want in 99% of the binding scenarios. You do want to get the POST values back into your input controls at all times, so that the data displayed on a form for the user matches what they typed. So if an error occurs, the error doesn't mysteriously disappear getting replaced either with a default value or some value that you changed on the model on your own. Makes sense. Still it is a little non-obvious because the way you create the UI elements with MVC, it certainly looks like your are binding to the model value:@Html.TextBoxFor( mod=> mod.User.Email, new {type="email",@class="inputfield",required="required" }) and so unless one understands a little bit about how the model binder works this is easy to trip up. At least it was for me. Even though I'm telling the control which model value to bind to, that model value is only used initially on GET operations. After that ModelState/POST values provide the display value. Workarounds The default behavior should be fine for 99% of binding scenarios. But if you do need fix up values based on your model rather than the default POST values, there are a number of ways that you can work around this. Initially when I ran into this, I couldn't figure out how to set the value using code and so the simplest solution to me was simply to not use the MVC Html Helper for the specific control and explicitly bind the model via HTML markup and @Razor expression: <input type="text" name="User.Email" id="User_Email" value="@Model.User.Email" /> And this produces the right result. This is easy enough to create, but feels a little out of place when using the @Html helpers for everything else. As you can see by the difference in the name and id values, you also are forced to remember the naming conventions that MVC imposes in order for ModelBinding to work properly which is a pain to remember and set manually (name is the same as the property with . syntax, id replaces dots with underlines). Use the ModelState Some of my original confusion came because I didn't understand how the model binder works. The model binder basically maintains ModelState on a postback, which holds a value and binding errors for each of the Post back value submitted on the page that can be mapped to the model. In other words there's one ModelState entry for each bound property of the model. Each ModelState entry contains a value property that holds AttemptedValue and RawValue properties. The AttemptedValue is essentially the POST value retrieved from the form. The RawValue is the value that the model holds. When MVC binds controls like @Html.TextBoxFor() or @Html.TextBox(), it always binds values on a GET operation. On a POST operation however, it'll always used the AttemptedValue to display the control. MVC binds using the ModelState on a POST operation, not the model's value. So, if you want the behavior that I was expecting originally you can actually get it by clearing the ModelState in the controller code:ModelState.Clear(); This clears out all the captured ModelState values, and effectively binds to the model. Note this will produce very similar results - in fact if there are no binding errors you see exactly the same behavior as if binding from ModelState, because the model has been updated from the ModelState already and binding to the updated values most likely produces the same values you would get with POST back values. The big difference though is that any values that couldn't bind - like say putting a string into a numeric field - will now not display back the value the user typed, but the default field value or whatever you changed the model value to. This is the behavior I was actually expecting previously. But - clearing out all values might be a bit heavy handed. You might want to fix up one or two values in a model but rarely would you want the entire model to update from the model. So, you can also clear out individual values on an as needed basis:if (userBus.DoesEmailExist(user.Email)) { userBus.ValidationErrors.Add("New email address exists already. Please…"); user.Email = oldEmail; ModelState.Remove("User.Email"); } This allows you to remove a single value from the ModelState and effectively allows you to replace that value for display from the model. Why? While researching this I came across a post from Microsoft's Brad Wilson who describes the default binding behavior best in a forum post: The reason we use the posted value for editors rather than the model value is that the model may not be able to contain the value that the user typed. Imagine in your "int" editor the user had typed "dog". You want to display an error message which says "dog is not valid", and leave "dog" in the editor field. However, your model is an int: there's no way it can store "dog". So we keep the old value. If you don't want the old values in the editor, clear out the Model State. That's where the old value is stored and pulled from the HTML helpers. There you have it. It's not the most intuitive behavior, but in hindsight this behavior does make some sense even if at first glance it looks like you should be able to update values from the model. The solution of clearing ModelState works and is a reasonable one but you have to know about some of the innards of ModelState and how it actually works to figure that out.© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in 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

  • How to work RavenDB Id with ASP.NET MVC Routes

    - by shiju
    By default RavenDB's Id would be sperated by "/". Let's say that we have a category object, the Ids would be like "categories/1". This will make problems when working with ASP.NET MVC's route rule. For a route category/edit/id, the uri would be category/edit/categories/1. You can solve this problem in two waysSolution 1 - Change Id SeparatorWe can use different Id Separator for RavenDB Ids in order to working with ASP.NET MVC route rules. The following code specify that Ids would be seperated by "-" rather than the default "/"  documentStore = new DocumentStore { Url = "http://localhost:8080/" };  documentStore.Initialize();  documentStore.Conventions.IdentityPartsSeparator = "-"; The above IdentityPartsSeparator would be generate Ids like "categories-1"Solution 2 - Modify ASP.NET MVC Route Modify the ASP.NET MVC routes in the Global.asax.cs file, as shown in the following code  routes.MapRoute(     "WithParam",                                           // Route name     "{controller}/{action}/{*id}"                         // URL with parameters     );  We just put "*" in front of the id variable that will be working with the default Id separator of RavenDB

    Read the article

  • Getting Started with ASP.NET MVC 3 and Razor

    - by dwahlin
    I had a chance to give a talk on ASP.NET MVC 3, Razor and jQuery today at a company and wanted to post the slides and demos from the talk. The focus was on getting started with ASP.NET MVC 3 projects and .cshtml files including creating pages using the new Razor syntax (which I personally love….never going back to the Web Forms View Engine) as well as working with jQuery. Topics covered in the demos (download below) include: Binding form data to custom object properties Validating a model using data annotations and IValidatableObject Integrating jQuery into MVC sites (using the DataTables plugin) Using the new WebGrid class to generate tables with sorting and paging functionality Integrating Silverlight applications into MVC sites Exposing JSON data from a controller action and consuming it in Silverlight Using the Ajax helper to add AJAX functionality (without jQuery)     The code and slides from the talk can be downloaded here.     If you or your company is interested in training, consulting or mentoring on jQuery or .NET technologies please visit http://www.thewahlingroup.com for more information. We’ve provided training, consulting and mentoring services to some of the largest companies in the world and would enjoy sharing our knowledge and real-world lessons learned with you.

    Read the article

  • MVC 4 and the App_Start folder

    - by pjohnson
    I've been delving into ASP.NET MVC 4 a little since its release last month. One thing I was chomping at the bit to explore was its bundling and minification functionality, for which I'd previously used Cassette, and been fairly happy with it. MVC 4's functionality seems very similar to Cassette's; the latter's CassetteConfiguration class matches the former's BundleConfig class, specified in a new directory called App_Start.At first glance, this seems like another special ASP.NET folder, like App_Data, App_GlobalResources, App_LocalResources, and App_Browsers. But Visual Studio 2010's lack of knowledge about it (no Solution Explorer option to add the folder, nor a fancy icon for it) made me suspicious. I found the MVC 4 project template has five classes there--AuthConfig, BundleConfig, FilterConfig, RouteConfig, and WebApiConfig. Each of these is called explicitly in Global.asax's Application_Start method. Why create separate classes, each with a single static method? Maybe they anticipate a lot more code being added there for large applications, but for small ones, it seems like overkill. (And they seem hastily implemented--some declared as static and some not, in the base namespace instead of an App_Start/AppStart one.) Even for a large application I work on with a substantial amount of code in Global.asax.cs, a RouteConfig might be warranted, but the other classes would remain tiny.More importantly, it appears App_Start has no special magic like the other folders--it's just convention. I found it first described in the MVC 3 timeframe by Microsoft architect David Ebbo, for the benefit of NuGet and WebActivator; apparently some packages will add their own classes to that directory as well. One of the first appears to be Ninject, as most mentions of that folder mention it, and there's not much information elsewhere about this new folder.

    Read the article

  • Best Practices for MVC Architecture

    - by Mystere Man
    There are a number of questions on StackOverflow regard MVC best practices, but most of those seem to revolve around things like using Dependancy Injection, or creating helper functions, or do's and don'ts of what to do in views and controllers. My question is more about how to architect an MVC application. For example, we are encouraged to use DI with the Repository pattern to decouple data access from the controller, however very little is said on HOW to do that specifically for MVC. Where would we place the Repository classes, for instance? They don't seem to be model related specifically, since the model should likewise be relatively decoupled from the actual data access technologies. A second question involves how to structure the layers or tiers. Most example applications (Nerd dinner, Music Store, etc..) all seem to use a single tier, 2 layer approach (not counting tests) that typically has controllers directly calling L2S or EF code. If I want to create a multi-tier/layer aplication what are some of the best practices there in regards to MVC? This question is one-part standard q-a, but another part best-practices, so it could go either here or programmers.se, I am marking it CW. If you feel it would be better suited to programmers.se then it can be migrated. EDIT: What happened to the Community Wiki option? It seems to be gone.

    Read the article

  • Organizing MVC entities communication

    - by Stefano Borini
    I have the following situation. Imagine you have a MainWindow object who is layouting two different widgets, ListWidget and DisplayWidget. ListWidget is populated with data from the disk. DisplayWidget shows the details of the selection the user performs in the ListWidget. I am planning to do the following: in MainWindow I have the following objects: ListWidget ListView ListModel ListController ListView is initialized passing the ListWidget. ListViewController is initialized passing the View and the Model. Same happens for the DisplayWidget: DisplayWidget DisplayView DisplayModel DisplayController I initialize the DisplayView with the widget, and initialize the Model with the ListController. I do this because the DisplayModel wraps the ListController to get the information about the current selection, and the data to be displayed in the DisplayView. I am very rusty with MVC, being out of UI programming since a while. Is this the expected interaction layout for having different MVC triplets communicate ? In other words, MVC focus on the interaction of three objects. How do you put this interaction as a whole into a larger context of communication with other similar entities, MVC or not ?

    Read the article

  • Is it correct to say that an ASP .NET MVC application is an HTTPModule?

    - by stormwild
    I just wanted to clarify my understanding of ASP .NET MVC (current version is 4). I was reading this article on How does ASP.NET MVC work? So, how does ASP.NET know how to route requests to MVC? The answer lies in web.config. There is a new http module added to modules collection in ASP.NET MVC projects So basically an mvc application is implemented as an HTTPModule or at least the url routing portion of an mvc app? Would it be possible for one to create and register a custom routing module and then possibly create their own micro mvc framework like Sinatra in Ruby or Slim in PHP?

    Read the article

  • Would the MSFT Report Viewer (rdlc) Work with MVC

    - by Mike Thomas
    I am interested in learning MVC, and have experimented with a couple of the sample apps. As a project, I'd like to move part or all of my own office app to MVC. An important part of this app, and of ALL of my apps for customers, is the printing of invoices, purchase orders, inventory lists and so forth. In fact, one of their main criteria for judging what we do is the appearance of these documents and their incorporation into the app in a practical, intuitive way. It's impossible for me to get by without a report writer. The MSFT report viewer used to produce rdlc reports has been sufficient, and even comes up better than the competition in a couple of key areas. Does this control work with an ASP.NET MVC application?

    Read the article

  • Collection of MVC CSS files available?

    - by Jaxidian
    Just curious - are there various customized Site.css files (and accompanying images) that work with the default ASP.NET MVC 2 templates? I'm a stereotypical developer who "doesn't do pretty" so I'd like to find a design that is good enough for me to use until I later have a designer come back and fix my design. Are there collections/libraries of various designs out there that work with the default templates? I did find this but the 2 popular ones I tried seem like they're for MVC 1, plus they in no way used the default tags with the MVC 2 templates.

    Read the article

  • ASP.Net MVC per area membership

    - by AdmSteck
    I am building an ASP.Net MVC app that will run on a shared hosting account to host multiple domains. I started with the default template that includes membership and created an mvc area for each domain. Routing is set up to point to the correct area depending on the domain the request is for. Now I would like to set up membership specific to each mvc area. I tried the obvious first and attempted to override the section of the web.config for each area to change the applicationName attribute of the provider. That doesn't work since the area is not set up as an application root. Is there an easy way to separate the users for each area?

    Read the article

  • MVC: On partial page start validation from JS without postback

    - by dwilliams459
    How do I start validation from the client/javascript using the MS MVC Validation library? Using MS ASP.Net MVC, I have a page with a PartialView in a modal dialog (change password). When the user selects 'save', I need to validate this on the client side without a full page postback. I am able in JS to post and refresh the partialView, however I am unable to start client validation. The MS MVC validation starts on postback (Input type='submit'). How can I start this in JS? Validation on the full page with postback works. Thanks, d

    Read the article

  • .NET MVC: How to use .NET controls with MVC?

    - by aximili
    I am very new to MVC. I've been learning to use plain HTML or HtmlHelpers, eg. for textbox, and get the value back in the Controller using Request.Form. But how do I use .NET controls with MVC? (eg. FileUpload) (The reason I ask is I am trying to use a custom control for uploading multiple files - it's Flajaxian File Uploader, if anyone knows about it. It works with webforms, but I have no idea how this thing is gonna work with MVC.) Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • How MVC (ASP.NET MVC) band 3-tier architecture can work together?

    - by Martin
    I am writing a design document and people on my team are willing to do the move from ASP.NET WebForm to ASP.NET MVC. This is great, but I have a hard time to understand how MVC workswith in a 3-tier (Data Layer, Business Layer and Presentation Layer) architecture. Can we say that the Model, View and Controller are part of the Presentation Layer? Is the Model part of the Business Layer? In brief, how MVC and 3-tier architecture can work together? Thanks for the help!

    Read the article

  • POST Ajax call results in not found using jqGrid and ASP.NET MVC 2 on IIS6

    - by Dan
    This is puzzling me. I deployed an MVC 2 application to IIS6 and everything works fine except for my jqGrid calls to get data. All is well on my development machine, but here are the two URLs I'm working with Local dev web server: POST http://localhost:port/Ctrl.mvc/JsonMethod IIS6 (notice https - not sure if that matters) POST https://www.domain.com/AppName/Ctrl.mvc/JsonMethod The latter URL results in a HTTP 404, which is really confusing as all works well on my local machine. The JsonMethod is properly declared with [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] Let me know if any more info is needed - I appreciate any and all help with this!

    Read the article

  • GZip/Deflate Compression in ASP.NET MVC

    - by Rick Strahl
    A long while back I wrote about GZip compression in ASP.NET. In that article I describe two generic helper methods that I've used in all sorts of ASP.NET application from WebForms apps to HttpModules and HttpHandlers that require gzip or deflate compression. The same static methods also work in ASP.NET MVC. Here are the two routines:/// <summary> /// Determines if GZip is supported /// </summary> /// <returns></returns> public static bool IsGZipSupported() { string AcceptEncoding = HttpContext.Current.Request.Headers["Accept-Encoding"]; if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(AcceptEncoding) && (AcceptEncoding.Contains("gzip") || AcceptEncoding.Contains("deflate"))) return true; return false; } /// <summary> /// Sets up the current page or handler to use GZip through a Response.Filter /// IMPORTANT: /// You have to call this method before any output is generated! /// </summary> public static void GZipEncodePage() { HttpResponse Response = HttpContext.Current.Response; if (IsGZipSupported()) { string AcceptEncoding = HttpContext.Current.Request.Headers["Accept-Encoding"]; if (AcceptEncoding.Contains("gzip")) { Response.Filter = new System.IO.Compression.GZipStream(Response.Filter, System.IO.Compression.CompressionMode.Compress); Response.Headers.Remove("Content-Encoding"); Response.AppendHeader("Content-Encoding", "gzip"); } else { Response.Filter = new System.IO.Compression.DeflateStream(Response.Filter, System.IO.Compression.CompressionMode.Compress); Response.Headers.Remove("Content-Encoding"); Response.AppendHeader("Content-Encoding", "deflate"); } } // Allow proxy servers to cache encoded and unencoded versions separately Response.AppendHeader("Vary", "Content-Encoding"); } The first method checks whether the client sending the request includes the accept-encoding for either gzip or deflate, and if if it does it returns true. The second function uses IsGzipSupported() to decide whether it should encode content and uses an Response Filter to do its job. Basically response filters look at the Response output stream as it's written and convert the data flowing through it. Filters are a bit tricky to work with but the two .NET filter streams for GZip and Deflate Compression make this a snap to implement. In my old code and even now in MVC I can always do:public ActionResult List(string keyword=null, int category=0) { WebUtils.GZipEncodePage(); …} to encode my content. And that works just fine. The proper way: Create an ActionFilterAttribute However in MVC this sort of thing is typically better handled by an ActionFilter which can be applied with an attribute. So to be all prim and proper I created an CompressContentAttribute ActionFilter that incorporates those two helper methods and which looks like this:/// <summary> /// Attribute that can be added to controller methods to force content /// to be GZip encoded if the client supports it /// </summary> public class CompressContentAttribute : ActionFilterAttribute { /// <summary> /// Override to compress the content that is generated by /// an action method. /// </summary> /// <param name="filterContext"></param> public override void OnActionExecuting(ActionExecutingContext filterContext) { GZipEncodePage(); } /// <summary> /// Determines if GZip is supported /// </summary> /// <returns></returns> public static bool IsGZipSupported() { string AcceptEncoding = HttpContext.Current.Request.Headers["Accept-Encoding"]; if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(AcceptEncoding) && (AcceptEncoding.Contains("gzip") || AcceptEncoding.Contains("deflate"))) return true; return false; } /// <summary> /// Sets up the current page or handler to use GZip through a Response.Filter /// IMPORTANT: /// You have to call this method before any output is generated! /// </summary> public static void GZipEncodePage() { HttpResponse Response = HttpContext.Current.Response; if (IsGZipSupported()) { string AcceptEncoding = HttpContext.Current.Request.Headers["Accept-Encoding"]; if (AcceptEncoding.Contains("gzip")) { Response.Filter = new System.IO.Compression.GZipStream(Response.Filter, System.IO.Compression.CompressionMode.Compress); Response.Headers.Remove("Content-Encoding"); Response.AppendHeader("Content-Encoding", "gzip"); } else { Response.Filter = new System.IO.Compression.DeflateStream(Response.Filter, System.IO.Compression.CompressionMode.Compress); Response.Headers.Remove("Content-Encoding"); Response.AppendHeader("Content-Encoding", "deflate"); } } // Allow proxy servers to cache encoded and unencoded versions separately Response.AppendHeader("Vary", "Content-Encoding"); } } It's basically the same code wrapped into an ActionFilter attribute, which intercepts requests MVC requests to Controller methods and lets you hook up logic before and after the methods have executed. Here I want to override OnActionExecuting() which fires before the Controller action is fired. With the CompressContentAttribute created, it can now be applied to either the controller as a whole:[CompressContent] public class ClassifiedsController : ClassifiedsBaseController { … } or to one of the Action methods:[CompressContent] public ActionResult List(string keyword=null, int category=0) { … } The former applies compression to every action method, while the latter is selective and only applies it to the individual action method. Is the attribute better than the static utility function? Not really, but it is the standard MVC way to hook up 'filter' content and that's where others are likely to expect to set options like this. In fact,  you have a bit more control with the utility function because you can conditionally apply it in code, but this is actually much less likely in MVC applications than old WebForms apps since controller methods tend to be more focused. Compression Caveats Http compression is very cool and pretty easy to implement in ASP.NET but you have to be careful with it - especially if your content might get transformed or redirected inside of ASP.NET. A good example, is if an error occurs and a compression filter is applied. ASP.NET errors don't clear the filter, but clear the Response headers which results in some nasty garbage because the compressed content now no longer matches the headers. Another issue is Caching, which has to account for all possible ways of compression and non-compression that the content is served. Basically compressed content and caching don't mix well. I wrote about several of these issues in an old blog post and I recommend you take a quick peek before diving into making every bit of output Gzip encoded. None of these are show stoppers, but you have to be aware of the issues. Related Posts GZip Compression with ASP.NET Content ASP.NET GZip Encoding Caveats© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in 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

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >