Search Results

Search found 215 results on 9 pages for 'requestcontext'.

Page 1/9 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  | Next Page >

  • Accessing RequestContext from with my MembershipProvider

    - by ScottSEA
    Is there an easier/better way to access the RequestContext from within a custom Membership Provider than the following (and further, will this method even work): private static RequestContext GetRequestContext() { HttpContextBase contextBase = new HttpContextWrapper(HttpContext.Current); return new RequestContext( contextBase, RouteTable.Routes.GetRouteData(contextBase)); }

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to get direct_to_template to pass RequestContext in django?

    - by BigJason
    I have found myself writing the same view over and over. It is basically this: def home_index(request): return render_to_response('home/index.html', RequestContext(request)) To keep with the dry principal, I would like to utilize a generic view. I have seen direct_to_template, but it passes an empty context. So how can I use a generic view and still get the power of RequestContext?

    Read the article

  • Django Getting RequestContext in custom tag

    - by greggory.hz
    I'm trying to create a custom tag. Inside this custom tag, I want to be able to have some logic that checks if the user is logged in, and then have the tag rendered accordingly. This is what I have: class UserActionNode(template.Node): def __init__(self): pass def render(self, context): if context.user.is_authenticated(): return render_to_string('layout_elements/sign_in_register.html'); else: return render_to_string('layout_elements/logout_settings.html'); def user_actions(parser, test): return UserActionNode() register.tag('user_actions', user_actions) When I run this, I get this error: Caught AttributeError while rendering: 'Context' object has no attribute 'user' The view that renders this looks like this: return render_to_response('start/home.html', {}, context_instance=RequestContext(request)) Why doesn't the tag get a RequestContext object instead of the Context object? How can I get the tag to receive the RequestContext instead of the Context? EDIT: Whether or not it's possible to get a RequestContext inside a custom tag, I'd still be interested to know the "correct" or best way to determine a user's authentication state from within the custom tag. If that's not possible, then perhaps that kind of logic belongs elsewhere? Where?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 2.0 + Implementation of a IRouteHandler does not fire

    - by Peter
    Can anybody please help me with this as I have no idea why public IHttpHandler GetHttpHandler(RequestContext requestContext) is not executing. In my Global.asax.cs I have public class MvcApplication : System.Web.HttpApplication { public static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes) { routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}"); routes.MapRoute( "Default", // Route name "{controller}/{action}/{id}", // URL with parameters new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = "" } // Parameter defaults ); routes.Add("ImageRoutes", new Route("Images/{filename}", new CustomRouteHandler())); } protected void Application_Start() { RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes); } } //CustomRouteHandler implementation is below public class CustomRouteHandler : IRouteHandler { public IHttpHandler GetHttpHandler(RequestContext requestContext) { // IF I SET A BREAK POINT HERE IT DOES NOT HIT FOR SOME REASON. string filename = requestContext.RouteData.Values["filename"] as string; if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(filename)) { // return a 404 HttpHandler here } else { requestContext.HttpContext.Response.Clear(); requestContext.HttpContext.Response.ContentType = GetContentType(requestContext.HttpContext.Request.Url.ToString()); // find physical path to image here. string filepath = requestContext.HttpContext.Server.MapPath("~/logo.jpg"); requestContext.HttpContext.Response.WriteFile(filepath); requestContext.HttpContext.Response.End(); } return null; } } Can any body tell me what I'm missing here. Simply public IHttpHandler GetHttpHandler(RequestContext requestContext) does not fire. I havn't change anything in the web.config either. What I'm missing here? Please help.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 2.0 + Implementation of a IRouteHandler goes not fire

    - by Peter
    Can anybody please help me with this as I have no idea why public IHttpHandler GetHttpHandler(RequestContext requestContext) is not executing. In my Global.asax.cs I have public class MvcApplication : System.Web.HttpApplication { public static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes) { routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}"); routes.MapRoute( "Default", // Route name "{controller}/{action}/{id}", // URL with parameters new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = "" } // Parameter defaults ); routes.Add("ImageRoutes", new Route("Images/{filename}", new CustomRouteHandler())); } protected void Application_Start() { RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes); } } //CustomRouteHandler implementation is below public class CustomRouteHandler : IRouteHandler { public IHttpHandler GetHttpHandler(RequestContext requestContext) { // IF I SET A BREAK POINT HERE IT DOES NOT HIT FOR SOME REASON. string filename = requestContext.RouteData.Values["filename"] as string; if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(filename)) { // return a 404 HttpHandler here } else { requestContext.HttpContext.Response.Clear(); requestContext.HttpContext.Response.ContentType = GetContentType(requestContext.HttpContext.Request.Url.ToString()); // find physical path to image here. string filepath = requestContext.HttpContext.Server.MapPath("~/logo.jpg"); requestContext.HttpContext.Response.WriteFile(filepath); requestContext.HttpContext.Response.End(); } return null; } } Can any body tell me what I'm missing here. Simply public IHttpHandler GetHttpHandler(RequestContext requestContext) does not fire. I havn't change anything in the web.config either. What I'm missing here? Please help.

    Read the article

  • Why you shouldn't add methods to interfaces in APIs

    - by Simon Cooper
    It is an oft-repeated maxim that you shouldn't add methods to a publically-released interface in an API. Recently, I was hit hard when this wasn't followed. As part of the work on ApplicationMetrics, I've been implementing auto-reporting of MVC action methods; whenever an action was called on a controller, ApplicationMetrics would automatically report it without the developer needing to add manual ReportEvent calls. Fortunately, MVC provides easy hook when a controller is created, letting me log when it happens - the IControllerFactory interface. Now, the dll we provide to instrument an MVC webapp has to be compiled against .NET 3.5 and MVC 1, as the lowest common denominator. This MVC 1 dll will still work when used in an MVC 2, 3 or 4 webapp because all MVC 2+ webapps have a binding redirect redirecting all references to previous versions of System.Web.Mvc to the correct version, and type forwards taking care of any moved types in the new assemblies. Or at least, it should. IControllerFactory In MVC 1 and 2, IControllerFactory was defined as follows: public interface IControllerFactory { IController CreateController(RequestContext requestContext, string controllerName); void ReleaseController(IController controller); } So, to implement the logging controller factory, we simply wrap the existing controller factory: internal sealed class LoggingControllerFactory : IControllerFactory { private readonly IControllerFactory m_CurrentController; public LoggingControllerFactory(IControllerFactory currentController) { m_CurrentController = currentController; } public IController CreateController( RequestContext requestContext, string controllerName) { // log the controller being used FeatureSessionData.ReportEvent("Controller used:", controllerName); return m_CurrentController.CreateController(requestContext, controllerName); } public void ReleaseController(IController controller) { m_CurrentController.ReleaseController(controller); } } Easy. This works as expected in MVC 1 and 2. However, in MVC 3 this type was throwing a TypeLoadException, saying a method wasn't implemented. It turns out that, in MVC 3, the definition of IControllerFactory was changed to this: public interface IControllerFactory { IController CreateController(RequestContext requestContext, string controllerName); SessionStateBehavior GetControllerSessionBehavior( RequestContext requestContext, string controllerName); void ReleaseController(IController controller); } There's a new method in the interface. So when our MVC 1 dll was redirected to reference System.Web.Mvc v3, LoggingControllerFactory tried to implement version 3 of IControllerFactory, was missing the GetControllerSessionBehaviour method, and so couldn't be loaded by the CLR. Implementing the new method Fortunately, there was a workaround. Because interface methods are normally implemented implicitly in the CLR, if we simply declare a virtual method matching the signature of the new method in MVC 3, then it will be ignored in MVC 1 and 2 and implement the extra method in MVC 3: internal sealed class LoggingControllerFactory : IControllerFactory { ... public virtual SessionStateBehaviour GetControllerSessionBehaviour( RequestContext requestContext, string controllerName) {} ... } However, this also has problems - the SessionStateBehaviour type only exists in .NET 4, and we're limited to .NET 3.5 by support for MVC 1 and 2. This means that the only solutions to support all MVC versions are: Construct the LoggingControllerFactory type at runtime using reflection Produce entirely separate dlls for MVC 1&2 and MVC 3. Ugh. And all because of that blasted extra method! Another solution? Fortunately, in this case, there is a third option - System.Web.Mvc also provides a DefaultControllerFactory type that can provide the implementation of GetControllerSessionBehaviour for us in MVC 3, while still allowing us to override CreateController and ReleaseController. However, this does mean that LoggingControllerFactory won't be able to wrap any calls to GetControllerSessionBehaviour. This is an acceptable bug, given the other options, as very few developers will be overriding GetControllerSessionBehaviour in their own custom controller factory. So, if you're providing an interface as part of an API, then please please please don't add methods to it. Especially if you don't provide a 'default' implementing type. Any code compiled against the previous version that can't be updated will have some very tough decisions to make to support both versions.

    Read the article

  • Custom ASP.NET Routing to an HttpHandler

    - by Rick Strahl
    As of version 4.0 ASP.NET natively supports routing via the now built-in System.Web.Routing namespace. Routing features are automatically integrated into the HtttpRuntime via a few custom interfaces. New Web Forms Routing Support In ASP.NET 4.0 there are a host of improvements including routing support baked into Web Forms via a RouteData property available on the Page class and RouteCollection.MapPageRoute() route handler that makes it easy to route to Web forms. To map ASP.NET Page routes is as simple as setting up the routes with MapPageRoute:protected void Application_Start(object sender, EventArgs e) { RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes); } void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes) { routes.MapPageRoute("StockQuote", "StockQuote/{symbol}", "StockQuote.aspx"); routes.MapPageRoute("StockQuotes", "StockQuotes/{symbolList}", "StockQuotes.aspx"); } and then accessing the route data in the page you can then use the new Page class RouteData property to retrieve the dynamic route data information:public partial class StockQuote1 : System.Web.UI.Page { protected StockQuote Quote = null; protected void Page_Load(object sender, EventArgs e) { string symbol = RouteData.Values["symbol"] as string; StockServer server = new StockServer(); Quote = server.GetStockQuote(symbol); // display stock data in Page View } } Simple, quick and doesn’t require much explanation. If you’re using WebForms most of your routing needs should be served just fine by this simple mechanism. Kudos to the ASP.NET team for putting this in the box and making it easy! How Routing Works To handle Routing in ASP.NET involves these steps: Registering Routes Creating a custom RouteHandler to retrieve an HttpHandler Attaching RouteData to your HttpHandler Picking up Route Information in your Request code Registering routes makes ASP.NET aware of the Routes you want to handle via the static RouteTable.Routes collection. You basically add routes to this collection to let ASP.NET know which URL patterns it should watch for. You typically hook up routes off a RegisterRoutes method that fires in Application_Start as I did in the example above to ensure routes are added only once when the application first starts up. When you create a route, you pass in a RouteHandler instance which ASP.NET caches and reuses as routes are matched. Once registered ASP.NET monitors the routes and if a match is found just prior to the HttpHandler instantiation, ASP.NET uses the RouteHandler registered for the route and calls GetHandler() on it to retrieve an HttpHandler instance. The RouteHandler.GetHandler() method is responsible for creating an instance of an HttpHandler that is to handle the request and – if necessary – to assign any additional custom data to the handler. At minimum you probably want to pass the RouteData to the handler so the handler can identify the request based on the route data available. To do this you typically add  a RouteData property to your handler and then assign the property from the RouteHandlers request context. This is essentially how Page.RouteData comes into being and this approach should work well for any custom handler implementation that requires RouteData. It’s a shame that ASP.NET doesn’t have a top level intrinsic object that’s accessible off the HttpContext object to provide route data more generically, but since RouteData is directly tied to HttpHandlers and not all handlers support it it might cause some confusion of when it’s actually available. Bottom line is that if you want to hold on to RouteData you have to assign it to a custom property of the handler or else pass it to the handler via Context.Items[] object that can be retrieved on an as needed basis. It’s important to understand that routing is hooked up via RouteHandlers that are responsible for loading HttpHandler instances. RouteHandlers are invoked for every request that matches a route and through this RouteHandler instance the Handler gains access to the current RouteData. Because of this logic it’s important to understand that Routing is really tied to HttpHandlers and not available prior to handler instantiation, which is pretty late in the HttpRuntime’s request pipeline. IOW, Routing works with Handlers but not with earlier in the pipeline within Modules. Specifically ASP.NET calls RouteHandler.GetHandler() from the PostResolveRequestCache HttpRuntime pipeline event. Here’s the call stack at the beginning of the GetHandler() call: which fires just before handler resolution. Non-Page Routing – You need to build custom RouteHandlers If you need to route to a custom Http Handler or other non-Page (and non-MVC) endpoint in the HttpRuntime, there is no generic mapping support available. You need to create a custom RouteHandler that can manage creating an instance of an HttpHandler that is fired in response to a routed request. Depending on what you are doing this process can be simple or fairly involved as your code is responsible based on the route data provided which handler to instantiate, and more importantly how to pass the route data on to the Handler. Luckily creating a RouteHandler is easy by implementing the IRouteHandler interface which has only a single GetHttpHandler(RequestContext context) method. In this method you can pick up the requestContext.RouteData, instantiate the HttpHandler of choice, and assign the RouteData to it. Then pass back the handler and you’re done.Here’s a simple example of GetHttpHandler() method that dynamically creates a handler based on a passed in Handler type./// <summary> /// Retrieves an Http Handler based on the type specified in the constructor /// </summary> /// <param name="requestContext"></param> /// <returns></returns> IHttpHandler IRouteHandler.GetHttpHandler(RequestContext requestContext) { IHttpHandler handler = Activator.CreateInstance(CallbackHandlerType) as IHttpHandler; // If we're dealing with a Callback Handler // pass the RouteData for this route to the Handler if (handler is CallbackHandler) ((CallbackHandler)handler).RouteData = requestContext.RouteData; return handler; } Note that this code checks for a specific type of handler and if it matches assigns the RouteData to this handler. This is optional but quite a common scenario if you want to work with RouteData. If the handler you need to instantiate isn’t under your control but you still need to pass RouteData to Handler code, an alternative is to pass the RouteData via the HttpContext.Items collection:IHttpHandler IRouteHandler.GetHttpHandler(RequestContext requestContext) { IHttpHandler handler = Activator.CreateInstance(CallbackHandlerType) as IHttpHandler; requestContext.HttpContext.Items["RouteData"] = requestContext.RouteData; return handler; } The code in the handler implementation can then pick up the RouteData from the context collection as needed:RouteData routeData = HttpContext.Current.Items["RouteData"] as RouteData This isn’t as clean as having an explicit RouteData property, but it does have the advantage that the route data is visible anywhere in the Handler’s code chain. It’s definitely preferable to create a custom property on your handler, but the Context work-around works in a pinch when you don’t’ own the handler code and have dynamic code executing as part of the handler execution. An Example of a Custom RouteHandler: Attribute Based Route Implementation In this post I’m going to discuss a custom routine implementation I built for my CallbackHandler class in the West Wind Web & Ajax Toolkit. CallbackHandler can be very easily used for creating AJAX, REST and POX requests following RPC style method mapping. You can pass parameters via URL query string, POST data or raw data structures, and you can retrieve results as JSON, XML or raw string/binary data. It’s a quick and easy way to build service interfaces with no fuss. As a quick review here’s how CallbackHandler works: You create an Http Handler that derives from CallbackHandler You implement methods that have a [CallbackMethod] Attribute and that’s it. Here’s an example of an CallbackHandler implementation in an ashx.cs based handler:// RestService.ashx.cs public class RestService : CallbackHandler { [CallbackMethod] public StockQuote GetStockQuote(string symbol) { StockServer server = new StockServer(); return server.GetStockQuote(symbol); } [CallbackMethod] public StockQuote[] GetStockQuotes(string symbolList) { StockServer server = new StockServer(); string[] symbols = symbolList.Split(new char[2] { ',',';' },StringSplitOptions.RemoveEmptyEntries); return server.GetStockQuotes(symbols); } } CallbackHandler makes it super easy to create a method on the server, pass data to it via POST, QueryString or raw JSON/XML data, and then retrieve the results easily back in various formats. This works wonderful and I’ve used these tools in many projects for myself and with clients. But one thing missing has been the ability to create clean URLs. Typical URLs looked like this: http://www.west-wind.com/WestwindWebToolkit/samples/Rest/StockService.ashx?Method=GetStockQuote&symbol=msfthttp://www.west-wind.com/WestwindWebToolkit/samples/Rest/StockService.ashx?Method=GetStockQuotes&symbolList=msft,intc,gld,slw,mwe&format=xml which works and is clear enough, but also clearly very ugly. It would be much nicer if URLs could look like this: http://www.west-wind.com//WestwindWebtoolkit/Samples/StockQuote/msfthttp://www.west-wind.com/WestwindWebtoolkit/Samples/StockQuotes/msft,intc,gld,slw?format=xml (the Virtual Root in this sample is WestWindWebToolkit/Samples and StockQuote/{symbol} is the route)(If you use FireFox try using the JSONView plug-in make it easier to view JSON content) So, taking a clue from the WCF REST tools that use RouteUrls I set out to create a way to specify RouteUrls for each of the endpoints. The change made basically allows changing the above to: [CallbackMethod(RouteUrl="RestService/StockQuote/{symbol}")] public StockQuote GetStockQuote(string symbol) { StockServer server = new StockServer(); return server.GetStockQuote(symbol); } [CallbackMethod(RouteUrl = "RestService/StockQuotes/{symbolList}")] public StockQuote[] GetStockQuotes(string symbolList) { StockServer server = new StockServer(); string[] symbols = symbolList.Split(new char[2] { ',',';' },StringSplitOptions.RemoveEmptyEntries); return server.GetStockQuotes(symbols); } where a RouteUrl is specified as part of the Callback attribute. And with the changes made with RouteUrls I can now get URLs like the second set shown earlier. So how does that work? Let’s find out… How to Create Custom Routes As mentioned earlier Routing is made up of several steps: Creating a custom RouteHandler to create HttpHandler instances Mapping the actual Routes to the RouteHandler Retrieving the RouteData and actually doing something useful with it in the HttpHandler In the CallbackHandler routing example above this works out to something like this: Create a custom RouteHandler that includes a property to track the method to call Set up the routes using Reflection against the class Looking for any RouteUrls in the CallbackMethod attribute Add a RouteData property to the CallbackHandler so we can access the RouteData in the code of the handler Creating a Custom Route Handler To make the above work I created a custom RouteHandler class that includes the actual IRouteHandler implementation as well as a generic and static method to automatically register all routes marked with the [CallbackMethod(RouteUrl="…")] attribute. Here’s the code:/// <summary> /// Route handler that can create instances of CallbackHandler derived /// callback classes. The route handler tracks the method name and /// creates an instance of the service in a predictable manner /// </summary> /// <typeparam name="TCallbackHandler">CallbackHandler type</typeparam> public class CallbackHandlerRouteHandler : IRouteHandler { /// <summary> /// Method name that is to be called on this route. /// Set by the automatically generated RegisterRoutes /// invokation. /// </summary> public string MethodName { get; set; } /// <summary> /// The type of the handler we're going to instantiate. /// Needed so we can semi-generically instantiate the /// handler and call the method on it. /// </summary> public Type CallbackHandlerType { get; set; } /// <summary> /// Constructor to pass in the two required components we /// need to create an instance of our handler. /// </summary> /// <param name="methodName"></param> /// <param name="callbackHandlerType"></param> public CallbackHandlerRouteHandler(string methodName, Type callbackHandlerType) { MethodName = methodName; CallbackHandlerType = callbackHandlerType; } /// <summary> /// Retrieves an Http Handler based on the type specified in the constructor /// </summary> /// <param name="requestContext"></param> /// <returns></returns> IHttpHandler IRouteHandler.GetHttpHandler(RequestContext requestContext) { IHttpHandler handler = Activator.CreateInstance(CallbackHandlerType) as IHttpHandler; // If we're dealing with a Callback Handler // pass the RouteData for this route to the Handler if (handler is CallbackHandler) ((CallbackHandler)handler).RouteData = requestContext.RouteData; return handler; } /// <summary> /// Generic method to register all routes from a CallbackHandler /// that have RouteUrls defined on the [CallbackMethod] attribute /// </summary> /// <typeparam name="TCallbackHandler">CallbackHandler Type</typeparam> /// <param name="routes"></param> public static void RegisterRoutes<TCallbackHandler>(RouteCollection routes) { // find all methods var methods = typeof(TCallbackHandler).GetMethods(BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Public); foreach (var method in methods) { var attrs = method.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(CallbackMethodAttribute), false); if (attrs.Length < 1) continue; CallbackMethodAttribute attr = attrs[0] as CallbackMethodAttribute; if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(attr.RouteUrl)) continue; // Add the route routes.Add(method.Name, new Route(attr.RouteUrl, new CallbackHandlerRouteHandler(method.Name, typeof(TCallbackHandler)))); } } } The RouteHandler implements IRouteHandler, and its responsibility via the GetHandler method is to create an HttpHandler based on the route data. When ASP.NET calls GetHandler it passes a requestContext parameter which includes a requestContext.RouteData property. This parameter holds the current request’s route data as well as an instance of the current RouteHandler. If you look at GetHttpHandler() you can see that the code creates an instance of the handler we are interested in and then sets the RouteData property on the handler. This is how you can pass the current request’s RouteData to the handler. The RouteData object also has a  RouteData.RouteHandler property that is also available to the Handler later, which is useful in order to get additional information about the current route. In our case here the RouteHandler includes a MethodName property that identifies the method to execute in the handler since that value no longer comes from the URL so we need to figure out the method name some other way. The method name is mapped explicitly when the RouteHandler is created and here the static method that auto-registers all CallbackMethods with RouteUrls sets the method name when it creates the routes while reflecting over the methods (more on this in a minute). The important point here is that you can attach additional properties to the RouteHandler and you can then later access the RouteHandler and its properties later in the Handler to pick up these custom values. This is a crucial feature in that the RouteHandler serves in passing additional context to the handler so it knows what actions to perform. The automatic route registration is handled by the static RegisterRoutes<TCallbackHandler> method. This method is generic and totally reusable for any CallbackHandler type handler. To register a CallbackHandler and any RouteUrls it has defined you simple use code like this in Application_Start (or other application startup code):protected void Application_Start(object sender, EventArgs e) { // Register Routes for RestService CallbackHandlerRouteHandler.RegisterRoutes<RestService>(RouteTable.Routes); } If you have multiple CallbackHandler style services you can make multiple calls to RegisterRoutes for each of the service types. RegisterRoutes internally uses reflection to run through all the methods of the Handler, looking for CallbackMethod attributes and whether a RouteUrl is specified. If it is a new instance of a CallbackHandlerRouteHandler is created and the name of the method and the type are set. routes.Add(method.Name,           new Route(attr.RouteUrl, new CallbackHandlerRouteHandler(method.Name, typeof(TCallbackHandler) )) ); While the routing with CallbackHandlerRouteHandler is set up automatically for all methods that use the RouteUrl attribute, you can also use code to hook up those routes manually and skip using the attribute. The code for this is straightforward and just requires that you manually map each individual route to each method you want a routed: protected void Application_Start(objectsender, EventArgs e){    RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes);}void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes) { routes.Add("StockQuote Route",new Route("StockQuote/{symbol}",                     new CallbackHandlerRouteHandler("GetStockQuote",typeof(RestService) ) ) );     routes.Add("StockQuotes Route",new Route("StockQuotes/{symbolList}",                     new CallbackHandlerRouteHandler("GetStockQuotes",typeof(RestService) ) ) );}I think it’s clearly easier to have CallbackHandlerRouteHandler.RegisterRoutes() do this automatically for you based on RouteUrl attributes, but some people have a real aversion to attaching logic via attributes. Just realize that the option to manually create your routes is available as well. Using the RouteData in the Handler A RouteHandler’s responsibility is to create an HttpHandler and as mentioned earlier, natively IHttpHandler doesn’t have any support for RouteData. In order to utilize RouteData in your handler code you have to pass the RouteData to the handler. In my CallbackHandlerRouteHandler when it creates the HttpHandler instance it creates the instance and then assigns the custom RouteData property on the handler:IHttpHandler handler = Activator.CreateInstance(CallbackHandlerType) as IHttpHandler; if (handler is CallbackHandler) ((CallbackHandler)handler).RouteData = requestContext.RouteData; return handler; Again this only works if you actually add a RouteData property to your handler explicitly as I did in my CallbackHandler implementation:/// <summary> /// Optionally store RouteData on this handler /// so we can access it internally /// </summary> public RouteData RouteData {get; set; } and the RouteHandler needs to set it when it creates the handler instance. Once you have the route data in your handler you can access Route Keys and Values and also the RouteHandler. Since my RouteHandler has a custom property for the MethodName to retrieve it from within the handler I can do something like this now to retrieve the MethodName (this example is actually not in the handler but target is an instance pass to the processor): // check for Route Data method name if (target is CallbackHandler) { var routeData = ((CallbackHandler)target).RouteData; if (routeData != null) methodToCall = ((CallbackHandlerRouteHandler)routeData.RouteHandler).MethodName; } When I need to access the dynamic values in the route ( symbol in StockQuote/{symbol}) I can retrieve it easily with the Values collection (RouteData.Values["symbol"]). In my CallbackHandler processing logic I’m basically looking for matching parameter names to Route parameters: // look for parameters in the routeif(routeData != null){    string parmString = routeData.Values[parameter.Name] as string;    adjustedParms[parmCounter] = ReflectionUtils.StringToTypedValue(parmString, parameter.ParameterType);} And with that we’ve come full circle. We’ve created a custom RouteHandler() that passes the RouteData to the handler it creates. We’ve registered our routes to use the RouteHandler, and we’ve utilized the route data in our handler. For completeness sake here’s the routine that executes a method call based on the parameters passed in and one of the options is to retrieve the inbound parameters off RouteData (as well as from POST data or QueryString parameters):internal object ExecuteMethod(string method, object target, string[] parameters, CallbackMethodParameterType paramType, ref CallbackMethodAttribute callbackMethodAttribute) { HttpRequest Request = HttpContext.Current.Request; object Result = null; // Stores parsed parameters (from string JSON or QUeryString Values) object[] adjustedParms = null; Type PageType = target.GetType(); MethodInfo MI = PageType.GetMethod(method, BindingFlags.Instance | BindingFlags.Public | BindingFlags.NonPublic); if (MI == null) throw new InvalidOperationException("Invalid Server Method."); object[] methods = MI.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(CallbackMethodAttribute), false); if (methods.Length < 1) throw new InvalidOperationException("Server method is not accessible due to missing CallbackMethod attribute"); if (callbackMethodAttribute != null) callbackMethodAttribute = methods[0] as CallbackMethodAttribute; ParameterInfo[] parms = MI.GetParameters(); JSONSerializer serializer = new JSONSerializer(); RouteData routeData = null; if (target is CallbackHandler) routeData = ((CallbackHandler)target).RouteData; int parmCounter = 0; adjustedParms = new object[parms.Length]; foreach (ParameterInfo parameter in parms) { // Retrieve parameters out of QueryString or POST buffer if (parameters == null) { // look for parameters in the route if (routeData != null) { string parmString = routeData.Values[parameter.Name] as string; adjustedParms[parmCounter] = ReflectionUtils.StringToTypedValue(parmString, parameter.ParameterType); } // GET parameter are parsed as plain string values - no JSON encoding else if (HttpContext.Current.Request.HttpMethod == "GET") { // Look up the parameter by name string parmString = Request.QueryString[parameter.Name]; adjustedParms[parmCounter] = ReflectionUtils.StringToTypedValue(parmString, parameter.ParameterType); } // POST parameters are treated as methodParameters that are JSON encoded else if (paramType == CallbackMethodParameterType.Json) //string newVariable = methodParameters.GetValue(parmCounter) as string; adjustedParms[parmCounter] = serializer.Deserialize(Request.Params["parm" + (parmCounter + 1).ToString()], parameter.ParameterType); else adjustedParms[parmCounter] = SerializationUtils.DeSerializeObject( Request.Params["parm" + (parmCounter + 1).ToString()], parameter.ParameterType); } else if (paramType == CallbackMethodParameterType.Json) adjustedParms[parmCounter] = serializer.Deserialize(parameters[parmCounter], parameter.ParameterType); else adjustedParms[parmCounter] = SerializationUtils.DeSerializeObject(parameters[parmCounter], parameter.ParameterType); parmCounter++; } Result = MI.Invoke(target, adjustedParms); return Result; } The code basically uses Reflection to loop through all the parameters available on the method and tries to assign the parameters from RouteData, QueryString or POST variables. The parameters are converted into their appropriate types and then used to eventually make a Reflection based method call. What’s sweet is that the RouteData retrieval is just another option for dealing with the inbound data in this scenario and it adds exactly two lines of code plus the code to retrieve the MethodName I showed previously – a seriously low impact addition that adds a lot of extra value to this endpoint callback processing implementation. Debugging your Routes If you create a lot of routes it’s easy to run into Route conflicts where multiple routes have the same path and overlap with each other. This can be difficult to debug especially if you are using automatically generated routes like the routes created by CallbackHandlerRouteHandler.RegisterRoutes. Luckily there’s a tool that can help you out with this nicely. Phill Haack created a RouteDebugging tool you can download and add to your project. The easiest way to do this is to grab and add this to your project is to use NuGet (Add Library Package from your Project’s Reference Nodes):   which adds a RouteDebug assembly to your project. Once installed you can easily debug your routes with this simple line of code which needs to be installed at application startup:protected void Application_Start(object sender, EventArgs e) { CallbackHandlerRouteHandler.RegisterRoutes<StockService>(RouteTable.Routes); // Debug your routes RouteDebug.RouteDebugger.RewriteRoutesForTesting(RouteTable.Routes); } Any routed URL then displays something like this: The screen shows you your current route data and all the routes that are mapped along with a flag that displays which route was actually matched. This is useful – if you have any overlap of routes you will be able to see which routes are triggered – the first one in the sequence wins. This tool has saved my ass on a few occasions – and with NuGet now it’s easy to add it to your project in a few seconds and then remove it when you’re done. Routing Around Custom routing seems slightly complicated on first blush due to its disconnected components of RouteHandler, route registration and mapping of custom handlers. But once you understand the relationship between a RouteHandler, the RouteData and how to pass it to a handler, utilizing of Routing becomes a lot easier as you can easily pass context from the registration to the RouteHandler and through to the HttpHandler. The most important thing to understand when building custom routing solutions is to figure out how to map URLs in such a way that the handler can figure out all the pieces it needs to process the request. This can be via URL routing parameters and as I did in my example by passing additional context information as part of the RouteHandler instance that provides the proper execution context. In my case this ‘context’ was the method name, but it could be an actual static value like an enum identifying an operation or category in an application. Basically user supplied data comes in through the url and static application internal data can be passed via RouteHandler property values. Routing can make your application URLs easier to read by non-techie types regardless of whether you’re building Service type or REST applications, or full on Web interfaces. Routing in ASP.NET 4.0 makes it possible to create just about any extensionless URLs you can dream up and custom RouteHanmdler References Sample ProjectIncludes the sample CallbackHandler service discussed here along with compiled versionsof the Westwind.Web and Westwind.Utilities assemblies.  (requires .NET 4.0/VS 2010) West Wind Web Toolkit includes full implementation of CallbackHandler and the Routing Handler West Wind Web Toolkit Source CodeContains the full source code to the Westwind.Web and Westwind.Utilities assemblies usedin these samples. Includes the source described in the post.(Latest build in the Subversion Repository) CallbackHandler Source(Relevant code to this article tree in Westwind.Web assembly) JSONView FireFoxPluginA simple FireFox Plugin to easily view JSON data natively in FireFox.For IE you can use a registry hack to display JSON as raw text.© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2011Posted in ASP.NET  AJAX  HTTP  

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC2 Routing Issue With StructureMap

    - by alphadogg
    So, in global.asax, I have: public static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes) { routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}"); routes.IgnoreRoute(" { *favicon }", new { favicon = @"(.*/)?favicon.ico(/.*)?" }); routes.IgnoreRoute("{*robotstxt}", new { robotstxt = @"(.*/)?robots.txt(/.*)?" }); routes.MapRoute( "Default", // Route name "{controller}/{action}/{id}", // URL with parameters new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional } // Parameter defaults ); } protected void Application_Start() { var container = new Container(); ServiceLocator.SetLocatorProvider(() => new StructureMapServiceLocator(container)); ComponentRegistrar.Register(container); Debug.WriteLine(container.WhatDoIHave()); // original MVC2 code at project startup AreaRegistration.RegisterAllAreas(); RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes); } and in my StructureMapControllerFactory, I have: protected override IController GetControllerInstance(RequestContext requestContext, Type controllerType) { if (requestContext == null) { throw new ArgumentNullException("requestContext"); } if (controllerType == null) { //return base.GetControllerInstance(requestContext, controllerType); controllerType = GetControllerType(requestContext, "Home"); requestContext.RouteData.Values["Controller"] = "Home"; requestContext.RouteData.Values["action"] = "Index"; } try { return theContainer.GetInstance(controllerType) as Controller; } catch (StructureMapException) { System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine(theContainer.WhatDoIHave()); throw; } } Now, normally, in most examples you find on the net, when controllerType is null, you have the commented out line (base.GetControllerInstance()) that handles it. However, if I use that, I get an error about not finding the controller for default.aspx when the controllerType is null at startup of the web app. If I force the use of the Home controller, I get the site to appear. What am I doing wrong? Is it a problem in routing?

    Read the article

  • Why doesn't my Unity DependencyResolver work on shared hosting but works locally?

    - by frennky
    I'm trying to deploy ASP.NET MVC 3 application wich uses Unity as a IoC container. Application works fine on local server, but when deployed it throws an exception: No parameterless constructor defined for this object. And this is thrown for a controller that should get some repository injected by my Unity DependencyResolver. I've installed Unity with NuGet so it should be referenced directly, and I've checked that it gets copied to bin folder. Edit: Here's the stack trace: [MissingMethodException: No parameterless constructor defined for this object.] System.RuntimeTypeHandle.CreateInstance(RuntimeType type, Boolean publicOnly, Boolean noCheck, Boolean& canBeCached, RuntimeMethodHandleInternal& ctor, Boolean& bNeedSecurityCheck) +0 System.RuntimeType.CreateInstanceSlow(Boolean publicOnly, Boolean skipCheckThis, Boolean fillCache) +98 System.RuntimeType.CreateInstanceDefaultCtor(Boolean publicOnly, Boolean skipVisibilityChecks, Boolean skipCheckThis, Boolean fillCache) +241 System.Activator.CreateInstance(Type type, Boolean nonPublic) +69 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultControllerActivator.Create(RequestContext requestContext, Type controllerType) +67 [InvalidOperationException: An error occurred when trying to create a controller of type 'nBlog.Controllers.HomeController'. Make sure that the controller has a parameterless public constructor.] System.Web.Mvc.DefaultControllerActivator.Create(RequestContext requestContext, Type controllerType) +182 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultControllerFactory.GetControllerInstance(RequestContext requestContext, Type controllerType) +80 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultControllerFactory.CreateController(RequestContext requestContext, String controllerName) +74 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.ProcessRequestInit(HttpContextBase httpContext, IController& controller, IControllerFactory& factory) +196 System.Web.Mvc.<>c__DisplayClass6.<BeginProcessRequest>b__2() +49 System.Web.Mvc.<>c__DisplayClassb`1.<ProcessInApplicationTrust>b__a() +13 System.Web.Mvc.SecurityUtil.<GetCallInAppTrustThunk>b__0(Action f) +7 System.Web.Mvc.SecurityUtil.ProcessInApplicationTrust(Action action) +22 System.Web.Mvc.SecurityUtil.ProcessInApplicationTrust(Func`1 func) +124 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.BeginProcessRequest(HttpContextBase httpContext, AsyncCallback callback, Object state) +98 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.BeginProcessRequest(HttpContext httpContext, AsyncCallback callback, Object state) +50 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.System.Web.IHttpAsyncHandler.BeginProcessRequest(HttpContext context, AsyncCallback cb, Object extraData) +16 System.Web.CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication.IExecutionStep.Execute() +8841400 System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously) +18 Anyone have an idea what might be the problem?

    Read the article

  • Mulit-tenant ASP.NET MVC – Controllers

    - by zowens
    Part I – Introduction Part II – Foundation   The time has come to talk about controllers in a multi-tenant ASP.NET MVC architecture. This is actually the most critical design decision you will make when dealing with multi-tenancy with MVC. In my design, I took into account the design goals I mentioned in the introduction about inversion of control and what a tenant is to my design. Be aware that this is only one way to achieve multi-tenant controllers.   The Premise MvcEx (which is a sample written by Rob Ashton) utilizes dynamic controllers. Essentially a controller is “dynamic” in that multiple action results can be placed in different “controllers” with the same name. This approach is a bit too complicated for my design. I wanted to stick with plain old inheritance when dealing with controllers. The basic premise of my controller design is that my main host defines a set of universal controllers. It is the responsibility of the tenant to decide if the tenant would like to utilize these core controllers. This can be done either by straight usage of the controller or inheritance for extension of the functionality defined by the controller. The controller is resolved by a StructureMap container that is attached to the tenant, as discussed in Part II.   Controller Resolution I have been thinking about two different ways to resolve controllers with StructureMap. One way is to use named instances. This is a really easy way to simply pull the controller right out of the container without a lot of fuss. I ultimately chose not to use this approach. The reason for this decision is to ensure that the controllers are named properly. If a controller has a different named instance that the controller type, then the resolution has a significant disconnect and there are no guarantees. The final approach, the one utilized by the sample, is to simply pull all controller types and correlate the type with a controller name. This has a bit of a application start performance disadvantage, but is significantly more approachable for maintainability. For example, if I wanted to go back and add a “ControllerName” attribute, I would just have to change the ControllerFactory to suit my needs.   The Code The container factory that I have built is actually pretty simple. That’s really all we need. The most significant method is the GetControllersFor method. This method makes the model from the Container and determines all the concrete types for IController.  The thing you might notice is that this doesn’t depend on tenants, but rather containers. You could easily use this controller factory for an application that doesn’t utilize multi-tenancy. public class ContainerControllerFactory : IControllerFactory { private readonly ThreadSafeDictionary<IContainer, IDictionary<string, Type>> typeCache; public ContainerControllerFactory(IContainerResolver resolver) { Ensure.Argument.NotNull(resolver, "resolver"); this.ContainerResolver = resolver; this.typeCache = new ThreadSafeDictionary<IContainer, IDictionary<string, Type>>(); } public IContainerResolver ContainerResolver { get; private set; } public virtual IController CreateController(RequestContext requestContext, string controllerName) { var controllerType = this.GetControllerType(requestContext, controllerName); if (controllerType == null) return null; var controller = this.ContainerResolver.Resolve(requestContext).GetInstance(controllerType) as IController; // ensure the action invoker is a ContainerControllerActionInvoker if (controller != null && controller is Controller && !((controller as Controller).ActionInvoker is ContainerControllerActionInvoker)) (controller as Controller).ActionInvoker = new ContainerControllerActionInvoker(this.ContainerResolver); return controller; } public void ReleaseController(IController controller) { if (controller != null && controller is IDisposable) ((IDisposable)controller).Dispose(); } internal static IEnumerable<Type> GetControllersFor(IContainer container) { Ensure.Argument.NotNull(container); return container.Model.InstancesOf<IController>().Select(x => x.ConcreteType).Distinct(); } protected virtual Type GetControllerType(RequestContext requestContext, string controllerName) { Ensure.Argument.NotNull(requestContext, "requestContext"); Ensure.Argument.NotNullOrEmpty(controllerName, "controllerName"); var container = this.ContainerResolver.Resolve(requestContext); var typeDictionary = this.typeCache.GetOrAdd(container, () => GetControllersFor(container).ToDictionary(x => ControllerFriendlyName(x.Name))); Type found = null; if (typeDictionary.TryGetValue(ControllerFriendlyName(controllerName), out found)) return found; return null; } private static string ControllerFriendlyName(string value) { return (value ?? string.Empty).ToLowerInvariant().Without("controller"); } } One thing to note about my implementation is that we do not use namespaces that can be utilized in the default ASP.NET MVC controller factory. This is something that I don’t use and have no desire to implement and test. The reason I am not using namespaces in this situation is because each tenant has its own namespaces and the routing would not make sense in this case.   Because we are using IoC, dependencies are automatically injected into the constructor. For example, a tenant container could implement it’s own IRepository and a controller could be defined in the “main” project. The IRepository from the tenant would be injected into the main project’s controller. This is quite a useful feature.   Again, the source code is on GitHub here.   Up Next Up next is the view resolution. This is a complicated issue, so be prepared. I hope that you have found this series useful. If you have any questions about my implementation so far, send me an email or DM me on Twitter. I have had a lot of great conversations about multi-tenancy so far and I greatly appreciate the feedback!

    Read the article

  • Login URL using authentication information in Django

    - by fuSi0N
    I'm working on a platform for online labs registration for my university. Login View [project views.py] from django.http import HttpResponse, HttpResponseRedirect, Http404 from django.shortcuts import render_to_response from django.template import RequestContext from django.contrib import auth def index(request): return render_to_response('index.html', {}, context_instance = RequestContext(request)) def login(request): if request.method == "POST": post = request.POST.copy() if post.has_key('username') and post.has_key('password'): usr = post['username'] pwd = post['password'] user = auth.authenticate(username=usr, password=pwd) if user is not None and user.is_active: auth.login(request, user) if user.get_profile().is_teacher: return HttpResponseRedirect('/teachers/'+user.username+'/') else: return HttpResponseRedirect('/students/'+user.username+'/') else: return render_to_response('index.html', {'msg': 'You don\'t belong here.'}, context_instance = RequestContext(request) return render_to_response('login.html', {}, context_instance = RequestContext(request)) def logout(request): auth.logout(request) return render_to_response('index.html', {}, context_instance = RequestContext(request)) URLS #========== PROJECT URLS ==========# urlpatterns = patterns('', (r'^media/(?P<path>.*)$', 'django.views.static.serve', {'document_root': settings.MEDIA_ROOT }), (r'^admin/', include(admin.site.urls)), (r'^teachers/', include('diogenis.teachers.urls')), (r'^students/', include('diogenis.students.urls')), (r'^login/', login), (r'^logout/', logout), (r'^$', index), ) #========== TEACHERS APP URLS ==========# urlpatterns = patterns('', (r'^(?P<username>\w{0,50})/', labs), ) The login view basically checks whether the logged in user is_teacher [UserProfile attribute via get_profile()] and redirects the user to his profile. Labs View [teachers app views.py] from django.http import HttpResponse, HttpResponseRedirect, Http404 from django.shortcuts import render_to_response from django.template import RequestContext from django.contrib.auth.decorators import user_passes_test from django.contrib.auth.models import User from accounts.models import * from labs.models import * def user_is_teacher(user): return user.is_authenticated() and user.get_profile().is_teacher @user_passes_test(user_is_teacher, login_url="/login/") def labs(request, username): q1 = User.objects.get(username=username) q2 = u'%s %s' % (q1.last_name, q1.first_name) q2 = Teacher.objects.get(name=q2) results = TeacherToLab.objects.filter(teacher=q2) return render_to_response('teachers/labs.html', {'results': results}, context_instance = RequestContext(request)) I'm using @user_passes_test decorator for checking whether the authenticated user has the permission to use this view [labs view]. The problem I'm having with the current logic is that once Django authenticates a teacher user he has access to all teachers profiles basically by typing the teachers username in the url. Once a teacher finds a co-worker's username he has direct access to his data. Any suggestions would be much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Handling MVC2 variables with hyphens in their name

    - by Jaxidian
    I'm working with some third-party software that creates querystring parameters with hyphens in their names. I was taking a look at this SO question and it seems like their solution is very close to what I need but I'm too ignorant to the underlying MVC stuff to figure out how to adapt this to do what I need. Ideally, I'd like to simply replace hyphens with underscores and that would be a good enough solution. If there's a better one, then I'm interested in hearing it. An example of a URL I want to handle is this: http://localhost/app/Person/List?First-Name=Bob with this Controller: public ActionResult List(string First_Name) { {...} } To repeat, I cannot change the querystring being generated so I need to support it with my controller somehow. But how? For reference, below is the custom RouteHandler that is being used to handle underscores in controller names and action names from the SO question I referenced above that we might be able to modify to accomplish what I want: public class HyphenatedRouteHandler : MvcRouteHandler { protected override IHttpHandler GetHttpHandler(RequestContext requestContext) { requestContext.RouteData.Values["controller"] = requestContext.RouteData.Values["controller"].ToString().Replace("-", "_"); requestContext.RouteData.Values["action"] = requestContext.RouteData.Values["action"].ToString().Replace("-", "_"); return base.GetHttpHandler(requestContext); } }

    Read the article

  • How to use StructureMap to inject repository classes to the controller?

    - by Lorenzo
    In the current application I am working on I have a custom ControllerFactory class that create a controller and automatically sets the Elmah ErrorHandler. public class BaseControllerFactory : DefaultControllerFactory { public override IController CreateController( RequestContext requestContext, string controllerName ) { var controller = base.CreateController( requestContext, controllerName ); var c = controller as Controller; if ( c != null ) { c.ActionInvoker = new ErrorHandlingActionInvoker( new HandleErrorWithElmahAttribute() ); } return controller; } protected override IController GetControllerInstance( RequestContext requestContext, Type controllerType ) { try { if ( ( requestContext == null ) || ( controllerType == null ) ) return base.GetControllerInstance( requestContext, controllerType ); return (Controller)ObjectFactory.GetInstance( controllerType ); } catch ( StructureMapException ) { System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine( ObjectFactory.WhatDoIHave() ); throw new Exception( ObjectFactory.WhatDoIHave() ); } } } I would like to use StructureMap to inject some code in my controllers. For example I would like to automatically inject repository classes in them. I have already created my repository classes and also I have added a constructor to the controller that receive the repository class public FirmController( IContactRepository contactRepository ) { _contactRepository = contactRepository; } I have then registered the type within StructureMap ObjectFactory.Initialize( x => { x.For<IContactRepository>().Use<MyContactRepository>(); }); How should I change the code in the CreateController method to have the IContactRepository concrete class injected in the FirmController? EDIT: I have changed the BaseControllerFactory to use Structuremap. But I get an exception on the line return (Controller)ObjectFactory.GetInstance( controllerType ); Any hint?

    Read the article

  • Creating STA COM compatible ASP.NET Applications

    - by Rick Strahl
    When building ASP.NET applications that interface with old school COM objects like those created with VB6 or Visual FoxPro (MTDLL), it's extremely important that the threads that are serving requests use Single Threaded Apartment Threading. STA is a COM built-in technology that allows essentially single threaded components to operate reliably in a multi-threaded environment. STA's guarantee that COM objects instantiated on a specific thread stay on that specific thread and any access to a COM object from another thread automatically marshals that thread to the STA thread. The end effect is that you can have multiple threads, but a COM object instance lives on a fixed never changing thread. ASP.NET by default uses MTA (multi-threaded apartment) threads which are truly free spinning threads that pay no heed to COM object marshaling. This is vastly more efficient than STA threading which has a bit of overhead in determining whether it's OK to run code on a given thread or whether some sort of thread/COM marshaling needs to occur. MTA COM components can be very efficient, but STA COM components in a multi-threaded environment always tend to have a fair amount of overhead. It's amazing how much COM Interop I still see today so while it seems really old school to be talking about this topic, it's actually quite apropos for me as I have many customers using legacy COM systems that need to interface with other .NET applications. In this post I'm consolidating some of the hacks I've used to integrate with various ASP.NET technologies when using STA COM Components. STA in ASP.NET Support for STA threading in the ASP.NET framework is fairly limited. Specifically only the original ASP.NET WebForms technology supports STA threading directly via its STA Page Handler implementation or what you might know as ASPCOMPAT mode. For WebForms running STA components is as easy as specifying the ASPCOMPAT attribute in the @Page tag:<%@ Page Language="C#" AspCompat="true" %> which runs the page in STA mode. Removing it runs in MTA mode. Simple. Unfortunately all other ASP.NET technologies built on top of the core ASP.NET engine do not support STA natively. So if you want to use STA COM components in MVC or with class ASMX Web Services, there's no automatic way like the ASPCOMPAT keyword available. So what happens when you run an STA COM component in an MTA application? In low volume environments - nothing much will happen. The COM objects will appear to work just fine as there are no simultaneous thread interactions and the COM component will happily run on a single thread or multiple single threads one at a time. So for testing running components in MTA environments may appear to work just fine. However as load increases and threads get re-used by ASP.NET COM objects will end up getting created on multiple different threads. This can result in crashes or hangs, or data corruption in the STA components which store their state in thread local storage on the STA thread. If threads overlap this global store can easily get corrupted which in turn causes problems. STA ensures that any COM object instance loaded always stays on the same thread it was instantiated on. What about COM+? COM+ is supposed to address the problem of STA in MTA applications by providing an abstraction with it's own thread pool manager for COM objects. It steps in to the COM instantiation pipeline and hands out COM instances from its own internally maintained STA Thread pool. This guarantees that the COM instantiation threads are STA threads if using STA components. COM+ works, but in my experience the technology is very, very slow for STA components. It adds a ton of overhead and reduces COM performance noticably in load tests in IIS. COM+ can make sense in some situations but for Web apps with STA components it falls short. In addition there's also the need to ensure that COM+ is set up and configured on the target machine and the fact that components have to be registered in COM+. COM+ also keeps components up at all times, so if a component needs to be replaced the COM+ package needs to be unloaded (same is true for IIS hosted components but it's more common to manage that). COM+ is an option for well established components, but native STA support tends to provide better performance and more consistent usability, IMHO. STA for non supporting ASP.NET Technologies As mentioned above only WebForms supports STA natively. However, by utilizing the WebForms ASP.NET Page handler internally it's actually possible to trick various other ASP.NET technologies and let them work with STA components. This is ugly but I've used each of these in various applications and I've had minimal problems making them work with FoxPro STA COM components which is about as dififcult as it gets for COM Interop in .NET. In this post I summarize several STA workarounds that enable you to use STA threading with these ASP.NET Technologies: ASMX Web Services ASP.NET MVC WCF Web Services ASP.NET Web API ASMX Web Services I start with classic ASP.NET ASMX Web Services because it's the easiest mechanism that allows for STA modification. It also clearly demonstrates how the WebForms STA Page Handler is the key technology to enable the various other solutions to create STA components. Essentially the way this works is to override the WebForms Page class and hijack it's init functionality for processing requests. Here's what this looks like for Web Services:namespace FoxProAspNet { public class WebServiceStaHandler : System.Web.UI.Page, IHttpAsyncHandler { protected override void OnInit(EventArgs e) { IHttpHandler handler = new WebServiceHandlerFactory().GetHandler( this.Context, this.Context.Request.HttpMethod, this.Context.Request.FilePath, this.Context.Request.PhysicalPath); handler.ProcessRequest(this.Context); this.Context.ApplicationInstance.CompleteRequest(); } public IAsyncResult BeginProcessRequest( HttpContext context, AsyncCallback cb, object extraData) { return this.AspCompatBeginProcessRequest(context, cb, extraData); } public void EndProcessRequest(IAsyncResult result) { this.AspCompatEndProcessRequest(result); } } public class AspCompatWebServiceStaHandlerWithSessionState : WebServiceStaHandler, IRequiresSessionState { } } This class overrides the ASP.NET WebForms Page class which has a little known AspCompatBeginProcessRequest() and AspCompatEndProcessRequest() method that is responsible for providing the WebForms ASPCOMPAT functionality. These methods handle routing requests to STA threads. Note there are two classes - one that includes session state and one that does not. If you plan on using ASP.NET Session state use the latter class, otherwise stick to the former. This maps to the EnableSessionState page setting in WebForms. This class simply hooks into this functionality by overriding the BeginProcessRequest and EndProcessRequest methods and always forcing it into the AspCompat methods. The way this works is that BeginProcessRequest() fires first to set up the threads and starts intializing the handler. As part of that process the OnInit() method is fired which is now already running on an STA thread. The code then creates an instance of the actual WebService handler factory and calls its ProcessRequest method to start executing which generates the Web Service result. Immediately after ProcessRequest the request is stopped with Application.CompletRequest() which ensures that the rest of the Page handler logic doesn't fire. This means that even though the fairly heavy Page class is overridden here, it doesn't end up executing any of its internal processing which makes this code fairly efficient. In a nutshell, we're highjacking the Page HttpHandler and forcing it to process the WebService process handler in the context of the AspCompat handler behavior. Hooking up the Handler Because the above is an HttpHandler implementation you need to hook up the custom handler and replace the standard ASMX handler. To do this you need to modify the web.config file (here for IIS 7 and IIS Express): <configuration> <system.webServer> <handlers> <remove name="WebServiceHandlerFactory-Integrated-4.0" /> <add name="Asmx STA Web Service Handler" path="*.asmx" verb="*" type="FoxProAspNet.WebServiceStaHandler" precondition="integrated"/> </handlers> </system.webServer> </configuration> (Note: The name for the WebServiceHandlerFactory-Integrated-4.0 might be slightly different depending on your server version. Check the IIS Handler configuration in the IIS Management Console for the exact name or simply remove the handler from the list there which will propagate to your web.config). For IIS 5 & 6 (Windows XP/2003) or the Visual Studio Web Server use:<configuration> <system.web> <httpHandlers> <remove path="*.asmx" verb="*" /> <add path="*.asmx" verb="*" type="FoxProAspNet.WebServiceStaHandler" /> </httpHandlers> </system.web></configuration> To test, create a new ASMX Web Service and create a method like this: [WebService(Namespace = "http://foxaspnet.org/")] [WebServiceBinding(ConformsTo = WsiProfiles.BasicProfile1_1)] public class FoxWebService : System.Web.Services.WebService { [WebMethod] public string HelloWorld() { return "Hello World. Threading mode is: " + System.Threading.Thread.CurrentThread.GetApartmentState(); } } Run this before you put in the web.config configuration changes and you should get: Hello World. Threading mode is: MTA Then put the handler mapping into Web.config and you should see: Hello World. Threading mode is: STA And you're on your way to using STA COM components. It's a hack but it works well! I've used this with several high volume Web Service installations with various customers and it's been fast and reliable. ASP.NET MVC ASP.NET MVC has quickly become the most popular ASP.NET technology, replacing WebForms for creating HTML output. MVC is more complex to get started with, but once you understand the basic structure of how requests flow through the MVC pipeline it's easy to use and amazingly flexible in manipulating HTML requests. In addition, MVC has great support for non-HTML output sources like JSON and XML, making it an excellent choice for AJAX requests without any additional tools. Unlike WebForms ASP.NET MVC doesn't support STA threads natively and so some trickery is needed to make it work with STA threads as well. MVC gets its handler implementation through custom route handlers using ASP.NET's built in routing semantics. To work in an STA handler requires working in the Page Handler as part of the Route Handler implementation. As with the Web Service handler the first step is to create a custom HttpHandler that can instantiate an MVC request pipeline properly:public class MvcStaThreadHttpAsyncHandler : Page, IHttpAsyncHandler, IRequiresSessionState { private RequestContext _requestContext; public MvcStaThreadHttpAsyncHandler(RequestContext requestContext) { if (requestContext == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("requestContext"); _requestContext = requestContext; } public IAsyncResult BeginProcessRequest(HttpContext context, AsyncCallback cb, object extraData) { return this.AspCompatBeginProcessRequest(context, cb, extraData); } protected override void OnInit(EventArgs e) { var controllerName = _requestContext.RouteData.GetRequiredString("controller"); var controllerFactory = ControllerBuilder.Current.GetControllerFactory(); var controller = controllerFactory.CreateController(_requestContext, controllerName); if (controller == null) throw new InvalidOperationException("Could not find controller: " + controllerName); try { controller.Execute(_requestContext); } finally { controllerFactory.ReleaseController(controller); } this.Context.ApplicationInstance.CompleteRequest(); } public void EndProcessRequest(IAsyncResult result) { this.AspCompatEndProcessRequest(result); } public override void ProcessRequest(HttpContext httpContext) { throw new NotSupportedException("STAThreadRouteHandler does not support ProcessRequest called (only BeginProcessRequest)"); } } This handler code figures out which controller to load and then executes the controller. MVC internally provides the information needed to route to the appropriate method and pass the right parameters. Like the Web Service handler the logic occurs in the OnInit() and performs all the processing in that part of the request. Next, we need a RouteHandler that can actually pick up this handler. Unlike the Web Service handler where we simply registered the handler, MVC requires a RouteHandler to pick up the handler. RouteHandlers look at the URL's path and based on that decide on what handler to invoke. The route handler is pretty simple - all it does is load our custom handler: public class MvcStaThreadRouteHandler : IRouteHandler { public IHttpHandler GetHttpHandler(RequestContext requestContext) { if (requestContext == null) throw new ArgumentNullException("requestContext"); return new MvcStaThreadHttpAsyncHandler(requestContext); } } At this point you can instantiate this route handler and force STA requests to MVC by specifying a route. The following sets up the ASP.NET Default Route:Route mvcRoute = new Route("{controller}/{action}/{id}", new RouteValueDictionary( new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional }), new MvcStaThreadRouteHandler()); RouteTable.Routes.Add(mvcRoute);   To make this code a little easier to work with and mimic the behavior of the routes.MapRoute() functionality extension method that MVC provides, here is an extension method for MapMvcStaRoute(): public static class RouteCollectionExtensions { public static void MapMvcStaRoute(this RouteCollection routeTable, string name, string url, object defaults = null) { Route mvcRoute = new Route(url, new RouteValueDictionary(defaults), new MvcStaThreadRouteHandler()); RouteTable.Routes.Add(mvcRoute); } } With this the syntax to add  route becomes a little easier and matches the MapRoute() method:RouteTable.Routes.MapMvcStaRoute( name: "Default", url: "{controller}/{action}/{id}", defaults: new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional } ); The nice thing about this route handler, STA Handler and extension method is that it's fully self contained. You can put all three into a single class file and stick it into your Web app, and then simply call MapMvcStaRoute() and it just works. Easy! To see whether this works create an MVC controller like this: public class ThreadTestController : Controller { public string ThreadingMode() { return Thread.CurrentThread.GetApartmentState().ToString(); } } Try this test both with only the MapRoute() hookup in the RouteConfiguration in which case you should get MTA as the value. Then change the MapRoute() call to MapMvcStaRoute() leaving all the parameters the same and re-run the request. You now should see STA as the result. You're on your way using STA COM components reliably in ASP.NET MVC. WCF Web Services running through IIS WCF Web Services provide a more robust and wider range of services for Web Services. You can use WCF over HTTP, TCP, and Pipes, and WCF services support WS* secure services. There are many features in WCF that go way beyond what ASMX can do. But it's also a bit more complex than ASMX. As a basic rule if you need to serve straight SOAP Services over HTTP I 'd recommend sticking with the simpler ASMX services especially if COM is involved. If you need WS* support or want to serve data over non-HTTP protocols then WCF makes more sense. WCF is not my forte but I found a solution from Scott Seely on his blog that describes the progress and that seems to work well. I'm copying his code below so this STA information is all in one place and quickly explain. Scott's code basically works by creating a custom OperationBehavior which can be specified via an [STAOperation] attribute on every method. Using his attribute you end up with a class (or Interface if you separate the contract and class) that looks like this: [ServiceContract] public class WcfService { [OperationContract] public string HelloWorldMta() { return Thread.CurrentThread.GetApartmentState().ToString(); } // Make sure you use this custom STAOperationBehavior // attribute to force STA operation of service methods [STAOperationBehavior] [OperationContract] public string HelloWorldSta() { return Thread.CurrentThread.GetApartmentState().ToString(); } } Pretty straight forward. The latter method returns STA while the former returns MTA. To make STA work every method needs to be marked up. The implementation consists of the attribute and OperationInvoker implementation. Here are the two classes required to make this work from Scott's post:public class STAOperationBehaviorAttribute : Attribute, IOperationBehavior { public void AddBindingParameters(OperationDescription operationDescription, System.ServiceModel.Channels.BindingParameterCollection bindingParameters) { } public void ApplyClientBehavior(OperationDescription operationDescription, System.ServiceModel.Dispatcher.ClientOperation clientOperation) { // If this is applied on the client, well, it just doesn’t make sense. // Don’t throw in case this attribute was applied on the contract // instead of the implementation. } public void ApplyDispatchBehavior(OperationDescription operationDescription, System.ServiceModel.Dispatcher.DispatchOperation dispatchOperation) { // Change the IOperationInvoker for this operation. dispatchOperation.Invoker = new STAOperationInvoker(dispatchOperation.Invoker); } public void Validate(OperationDescription operationDescription) { if (operationDescription.SyncMethod == null) { throw new InvalidOperationException("The STAOperationBehaviorAttribute " + "only works for synchronous method invocations."); } } } public class STAOperationInvoker : IOperationInvoker { IOperationInvoker _innerInvoker; public STAOperationInvoker(IOperationInvoker invoker) { _innerInvoker = invoker; } public object[] AllocateInputs() { return _innerInvoker.AllocateInputs(); } public object Invoke(object instance, object[] inputs, out object[] outputs) { // Create a new, STA thread object[] staOutputs = null; object retval = null; Thread thread = new Thread( delegate() { retval = _innerInvoker.Invoke(instance, inputs, out staOutputs); }); thread.SetApartmentState(ApartmentState.STA); thread.Start(); thread.Join(); outputs = staOutputs; return retval; } public IAsyncResult InvokeBegin(object instance, object[] inputs, AsyncCallback callback, object state) { // We don’t handle async… throw new NotImplementedException(); } public object InvokeEnd(object instance, out object[] outputs, IAsyncResult result) { // We don’t handle async… throw new NotImplementedException(); } public bool IsSynchronous { get { return true; } } } The key in this setup is the Invoker and the Invoke method which creates a new thread and then fires the request on this new thread. Because this approach creates a new thread for every request it's not super efficient. There's a bunch of overhead involved in creating the thread and throwing it away after each thread, but it'll work for low volume requests and insure each thread runs in STA mode. If better performance is required it would be useful to create a custom thread manager that can pool a number of STA threads and hand off threads as needed rather than creating new threads on every request. If your Web Service needs are simple and you need only to serve standard SOAP 1.x requests, I would recommend sticking with ASMX services. It's easier to set up and work with and for STA component use it'll be significantly better performing since ASP.NET manages the STA thread pool for you rather than firing new threads for each request. One nice thing about Scotts code is though that it works in any WCF environment including self hosting. It has no dependency on ASP.NET or WebForms for that matter. STA - If you must STA components are a  pain in the ass and thankfully there isn't too much stuff out there anymore that requires it. But when you need it and you need to access STA functionality from .NET at least there are a few options available to make it happen. Each of these solutions is a bit hacky, but they work - I've used all of them in production with good results with FoxPro components. I hope compiling all of these in one place here makes it STA consumption a little bit easier. I feel your pain :-) Resources Download STA Handler Code Examples Scott Seely's original STA WCF OperationBehavior Article© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in FoxPro   ASP.NET  .NET  COM   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

  • Integrating WIF with WCF Data Services

    - by cibrax
    A time ago I discussed how a custom REST Starter kit interceptor could be used to parse a SAML token in the Http Authorization header and wrap that into a ClaimsPrincipal that the WCF services could use. The thing is that code was initially created for Geneva framework, so it got deprecated quickly. I recently needed that piece of code for one of projects where I am currently working on so I decided to update it for WIF. As this interceptor can be injected in any host for WCF REST services, also represents an excellent solution for integrating claim-based security into WCF Data Services (previously known as ADO.NET Data Services). The interceptor basically expects a SAML token in the Authorization header. If a token is found, it is parsed and a new ClaimsPrincipal is initialized and injected in the WCF authorization context. public class SamlAuthenticationInterceptor : RequestInterceptor {   SecurityTokenHandlerCollection handlers;   public SamlAuthenticationInterceptor()     : base(false)   {     this.handlers = FederatedAuthentication.ServiceConfiguration.SecurityTokenHandlers;   }   public override void ProcessRequest(ref RequestContext requestContext)   {     SecurityToken token = ExtractCredentials(requestContext.RequestMessage);     if (token != null)     {       ClaimsIdentityCollection claims = handlers.ValidateToken(token);       var principal = new ClaimsPrincipal(claims);       InitializeSecurityContext(requestContext.RequestMessage, principal);     }     else     {       DenyAccess(ref requestContext);     }   }   private void DenyAccess(ref RequestContext requestContext)   {     Message reply = Message.CreateMessage(MessageVersion.None, null);     HttpResponseMessageProperty responseProperty = new HttpResponseMessageProperty() { StatusCode = HttpStatusCode.Unauthorized };     responseProperty.Headers.Add("WWW-Authenticate",           String.Format("Basic realm=\"{0}\"", ""));     reply.Properties[HttpResponseMessageProperty.Name] = responseProperty;     requestContext.Reply(reply);     requestContext = null;   }   private SecurityToken ExtractCredentials(Message requestMessage)   {     HttpRequestMessageProperty request = (HttpRequestMessageProperty)  requestMessage.Properties[HttpRequestMessageProperty.Name];     string authHeader = request.Headers["Authorization"];     if (authHeader != null && authHeader.Contains("<saml"))     {       XmlTextReader xmlReader = new XmlTextReader(new StringReader(authHeader));       var col = SecurityTokenHandlerCollection.CreateDefaultSecurityTokenHandlerCollection();       SecurityToken token = col.ReadToken(xmlReader);                                        return token;     }     return null;   }   private void InitializeSecurityContext(Message request, IPrincipal principal)   {     List<IAuthorizationPolicy> policies = new List<IAuthorizationPolicy>();     policies.Add(new PrincipalAuthorizationPolicy(principal));     ServiceSecurityContext securityContext = new ServiceSecurityContext(policies.AsReadOnly());     if (request.Properties.Security != null)     {       request.Properties.Security.ServiceSecurityContext = securityContext;     }     else     {       request.Properties.Security = new SecurityMessageProperty() { ServiceSecurityContext = securityContext };      }    }    class PrincipalAuthorizationPolicy : IAuthorizationPolicy    {      string id = Guid.NewGuid().ToString();      IPrincipal user;      public PrincipalAuthorizationPolicy(IPrincipal user)      {        this.user = user;      }      public ClaimSet Issuer      {        get { return ClaimSet.System; }      }      public string Id      {        get { return this.id; }      }      public bool Evaluate(EvaluationContext evaluationContext, ref object state)      {        evaluationContext.AddClaimSet(this, new DefaultClaimSet(System.IdentityModel.Claims.Claim.CreateNameClaim(user.Identity.Name)));        evaluationContext.Properties["Identities"] = new List<IIdentity>(new IIdentity[] { user.Identity });        evaluationContext.Properties["Principal"] = user;        return true;      }    } A WCF Data Service, as any other WCF Service, contains a service host where this interceptor can be injected. The following code illustrates how that can be done in the “svc” file. <%@ ServiceHost Language="C#" Debug="true" Service="ContactsDataService"                 Factory="AppServiceHostFactory" %> using System; using System.ServiceModel; using System.ServiceModel.Activation; using Microsoft.ServiceModel.Web; class AppServiceHostFactory : ServiceHostFactory {    protected override ServiceHost CreateServiceHost(Type serviceType, Uri[] baseAddresses)   {     WebServiceHost2 result = new WebServiceHost2(serviceType, true, baseAddresses);     result.Interceptors.Add(new SamlAuthenticationInterceptor());                 return result;   } } WCF Data Services includes an specific WCF host of out the box (DataServiceHost). However, the service is not affected at all if you replace it with a custom one as I am doing in the code above (WebServiceHost2 is part of the REST Starter kit). Finally, the client application needs to pass the SAML token somehow to the data service. In case you are using any Http client library for consuming the data service, that’s easy to do, you only need to include the SAML token as part of the “Authorization” header. If you are using the auto-generated data service proxy, a little piece of code is needed to inject a SAML token into the DataServiceContext instance. That class provides an event “SendingRequest” that any client application can leverage to include custom code that modified the Http request before it is sent to the service. So, you can easily create an extension method for the DataServiceContext that negotiates the SAML token with an existing STS, and adds that token as part of the “Authorization” header. public static class DataServiceContextExtensions {        public static void ConfigureFederatedCredentials(this DataServiceContext context, string baseStsAddress, string realm)   {     string address = string.Format(STSAddressFormat, baseStsAddress, realm);                  string token = NegotiateSecurityToken(address);     context.SendingRequest += (source, args) =>     {       args.RequestHeaders.Add("Authorization", token);     };   } private string NegotiateSecurityToken(string address) { } } I left the NegociateSecurityToken method empty for this extension as it depends pretty much on how you are negotiating tokens from an existing STS. In case you want to end-to-end REST solution that involves an Http endpoint for the STS, you should definitely take a look at the Thinktecture starter STS project in codeplex.

    Read the article

  • django {% tag %} problem

    - by Sevenearths
    I don't know if its me but {% tag ??? %} has bee behaving a bit sporadically round me (django ver 1.2.3). I have the following main.html file: <html> {% include 'main/main_css.html' %} <body> test! <a href="{% url login.views.logout_view %}">logout</a> test! <a href="{% url client.views.client_search_last_name_view %}">logout</a> </body> </html> with the urls.py being: from django.conf.urls.defaults import * import settings from login.views import * from mainapp.views import * from client.views import * # Uncomment the next two lines to enable the admin: from django.contrib import admin admin.autodiscover() urlpatterns = patterns('', # Example: # (r'^weclaim/', include('weclaim.foo.urls')), (r'^login/$', 'login.views.login_view'), (r'^logout/$', 'login.views.logout_view'), (r'^$', 'mainapp.views.main_view'), (r'^client/search/last_name/(A-Za-z)/$', 'client.views.client_search_last_name_view'), #(r'^client/search/post_code/(A-Za-z)/$', 'client.views.client_search_last_name_view'), # Uncomment the next line to enable the admin: (r'^admin/', include(admin.site.urls)), (r'^static/(?P<path>.*)$', 'django.views.static.serve',{'document_root': settings.MEDIA_ROOT}), ) and the views.py for login being: from django.shortcuts import render_to_response, redirect from django.template import RequestContext from django.contrib import auth import mainapp.views def login_view(request): if request.method == 'POST': uname = request.POST.get('username', '') psword = request.POST.get('password', '') user = auth.authenticate(username=uname, password=psword) # if the user logs in and is active if user is not None and user.is_active: auth.login(request, user) return redirect(mainapp.views.main_view) else: return render_to_response('loginpage.html', {'login_failed': '1',}, context_instance=RequestContext(request)) else: return render_to_response('loginpage.html', {'dave': '1',}, context_instance=RequestContext(request)) def logout_view(request): auth.logout(request) return render_to_response('loginpage.html', {'logged_out': '1',}, context_instance=RequestContext(request)) and the views.py for clients being: from django.shortcuts import render_to_response, redirect from django.template import RequestContext import login.views def client_search_last_name_view(request): if request.user.is_authenticated(): return render_to_response('client/client_search_last_name.html', {}, context_instance=RequestContext(request)) else: return redirect(login.views.login_view) Yet when I login it django raises an 'NoReverseMatch' for {% url client.views.client_search_last_name_view %} but not for {% url login.views.logout_view %} Now why would this be?

    Read the article

  • Using {% url ??? %} in django templates

    - by user563247
    I have looked a lot on google for answers of how to use the 'url' tag in templates only to find many responses saying 'You just insert it into your template and point it at the view you want the url for'. Well no joy for me :( I have tried every permutation possible and have resorted to posting here as a last resort. So here it is. My urls.py looks like this: from django.conf.urls.defaults import * from login.views import * from mainapp.views import * import settings # Uncomment the next two lines to enable the admin: from django.contrib import admin admin.autodiscover() urlpatterns = patterns('', # Example: # (r'^weclaim/', include('weclaim.foo.urls')), (r'^login/', login_view), (r'^logout/', logout_view), ('^$', main_view), # Uncomment the admin/doc line below and add 'django.contrib.admindocs' # to INSTALLED_APPS to enable admin documentation: # (r'^admin/doc/', include('django.contrib.admindocs.urls')), # Uncomment the next line to enable the admin: (r'^admin/', include(admin.site.urls)), #(r'^static/(?P<path>.*)$', 'django.views.static.serve',{'document_root': '/home/arthur/Software/django/weclaim/templates/static'}), (r'^static/(?P<path>.*)$', 'django.views.static.serve',{'document_root': settings.MEDIA_ROOT}), ) My 'views.py' in my 'login' directory looks like: from django.shortcuts import render_to_response, redirect from django.template import RequestContext from django.contrib import auth def login_view(request): if request.method == 'POST': uname = request.POST.get('username', '') psword = request.POST.get('password', '') user = auth.authenticate(username=uname, password=psword) # if the user logs in and is active if user is not None and user.is_active: auth.login(request, user) return render_to_response('main/main.html', {}, context_instance=RequestContext(request)) #return redirect(main_view) else: return render_to_response('loginpage.html', {'box_width': '402', 'login_failed': '1',}, context_instance=RequestContext(request)) else: return render_to_response('loginpage.html', {'box_width': '400',}, context_instance=RequestContext(request)) def logout_view(request): auth.logout(request) return render_to_response('loginpage.html', {'box_width': '402', 'logged_out': '1',}, context_instance=RequestContext(request)) and finally the main.html to which the login_view points looks like: <html> <body> test! <a href="{% url logout_view %}">logout</a> </body> </html> So why do I get 'NoReverseMatch' every time? *(on a slightly different note I had to use 'context_instance=RequestContext(request)' at the end of all my render-to-response's because otherwise it would not recognise {{ MEDIA_URL }} in my templates and I couldn't reference any css or js files. I'm not to sure why this is. Doesn't seem right to me)*

    Read the article

  • Dependency injection and factory

    - by legenden
    Trying to figure out how to best handle the following scenario: Assume a RequestContext class which has a dependency to an external service, such as: public class RequestContext : IRequestContext { private readonly ServiceFactory<IWeatherService> _weatherService; public RequestContext(ServiceFactory<IWeatherService> weatherService, UserLocation location, string query) { _weatherService = weatherService; ... What sort of dependency should I require in the class that will ultimately instantiate RequestContext? It could be ServiceFactory<IWeatherService>, but that doesn't seem right, or I could create an IRequestContextFactory for it along the lines of: public class RequestContextFactory : IRequestContextFactory { private readonly ServiceFactory<IWeatherService> _weatherService; public RequestContextFactory(ServiceFactory<IWeatherService> weatherService) { _weatherService = weatherService; } public RequestContext Create(UserLocation location, string query) { return new RequestContext(_weatherService, location, query); } } And then pass the IRequestContextFactory through constructor injection. This seems like a good way to do it, but the problem with this approach is that I think it hinders discoverability (devs must know about the factory and implement it, which is not really apparent). Is there a better/more discoverable way that I'm missing?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NEt MVC 2 application error on IIS7 works fine on local machine

    - by aspCoolguy
    My ASP.NET MVC2 application is developed using 1. VS 2010 2. Linq To SQL for Models Here is Call controller code: namespace CallTrackMVC.Controllers { public class CallController : Controller { private CallTrackRepository repository; public CallController():this(new CallTrackRepository()) { } public CallController(CallTrackRepository newRepository) { repository = newRepository; } } } Error on IIS7 when browsing the Call Create page is NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object.] CallTrackMVC.Models.ExecOfficeDataContext..ctor() in C:\ClearCase\rartadi_view\STS_Dev_TEST\CallTrackMVC\Models\ExecOffice.designer.cs:71 CallTrackMVC.Controllers.CallController..ctor() in C:\ClearCase\rartadi_view\STS_Dev_TEST\CallTrackMVC\Controllers\CallController.cs:16 [TargetInvocationException: Exception has been thrown by the target of an invocation.] System.RuntimeTypeHandle.CreateInstance(RuntimeType type, Boolean publicOnly, Boolean noCheck, Boolean& canBeCached, RuntimeMethodHandleInternal& ctor, Boolean& bNeedSecurityCheck) +0 System.RuntimeType.CreateInstanceSlow(Boolean publicOnly, Boolean skipCheckThis, Boolean fillCache) +117 System.RuntimeType.CreateInstanceDefaultCtor(Boolean publicOnly, Boolean skipVisibilityChecks, Boolean skipCheckThis, Boolean fillCache) +247 System.Activator.CreateInstance(Type type, Boolean nonPublic) +106 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultControllerFactory.GetControllerInstance(RequestContext requestContext, Type controllerType) +102 [InvalidOperationException: **An error occurred when trying to create a controller of type 'CallTrackMVC.Controllers.CallController'. Make sure that the controller has a parameterless public constructor.**] System.Web.Mvc.DefaultControllerFactory.GetControllerInstance(RequestContext requestContext, Type controllerType) +541 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultControllerFactory.CreateController(RequestContext requestContext, String controllerName) +85 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.ProcessRequestInit(HttpContextBase httpContext, IController& controller, IControllerFactory& factory) +165 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.BeginProcessRequest(HttpContextBase httpContext, AsyncCallback callback, Object state) +80 System.Web.CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication.IExecutionStep.Execute() +389 System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously) +371 Code in Global.asax is protected void Application_Start() { AreaRegistration.RegisterAllAreas(); RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes); } Any suggestion would be a great help.

    Read the article

  • my asp.net mvc 2.0 application fails with error "No parameterless constructor defined for this objec

    - by loviji
    Hello, i'm new in asp.net mvc 2. I'm trying to list all data from one table(ms sql server table). as ORM I use Entity Framework. now, I'm tried to write something to do this: Model: private uqsEntities _uqsEntity; public permissionRepository(uqsEntities uqsEntity) { _uqsEntity = uqsEntity; } public IEnumerable<userPermissions> getAllData() { return _uqsEntity.userPermissions; } controller: private DataManager _dataManager; public ManagePermissionsController(DataManager datamanager) { _dataManager = datamanager; } public ActionResult Index() { return RedirectToAction("List"); } [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Get)] public ActionResult List() { return List(null); } [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] public ActionResult List(int? userID) { return View(_dataManager.Permission.getAllData().ToList()); } Route: routes.MapRoute( "ManagePerm", // Route name "{controller}/{action}/{id}", // URL with parameters new { controller = "ManagePermissions", action = "Index"}, new string[] { "uqs.Controllers" } // Parameter defaults ); and View automatically generated by Visual Studio(in action mouse right-click). when I run app. , my app. fails. No parameterless constructor defined for this object. 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.MissingMethodException: No parameterless constructor defined for this object. 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: [MissingMethodException: No parameterless constructor defined for this object.] System.RuntimeTypeHandle.CreateInstance(RuntimeType type, Boolean publicOnly, Boolean noCheck, Boolean& canBeCached, RuntimeMethodHandle& ctor, Boolean& bNeedSecurityCheck) +0 System.RuntimeType.CreateInstanceSlow(Boolean publicOnly, Boolean fillCache) +86 System.RuntimeType.CreateInstanceImpl(Boolean publicOnly, Boolean skipVisibilityChecks, Boolean fillCache) +230 System.Activator.CreateInstance(Type type, Boolean nonPublic) +67 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultControllerFactory.GetControllerInstance(RequestContext requestContext, Type controllerType) +80 [InvalidOperationException: An error occurred when trying to create a controller of type 'uqs.Controllers.ManagePermissionsController'. Make sure that the controller has a parameterless public constructor.] System.Web.Mvc.DefaultControllerFactory.GetControllerInstance(RequestContext requestContext, Type controllerType) +190 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultControllerFactory.CreateController(RequestContext requestContext, String controllerName) +68 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.ProcessRequestInit(HttpContextBase httpContext, IController& controller, IControllerFactory& factory) +118 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.BeginProcessRequest(HttpContextBase httpContext, AsyncCallback callback, Object state) +46 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.BeginProcessRequest(HttpContext httpContext, AsyncCallback callback, Object state) +63 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.System.Web.IHttpAsyncHandler.BeginProcessRequest(HttpContext context, AsyncCallback cb, Object extraData) +13 System.Web.CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication.IExecutionStep.Execute() +8679186 System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously) +155 please, somebody, help me to catch problem.

    Read the article

  • What might cause the big overhead of making a HttpWebRequest call?

    - by Dimitri C.
    When I send/receive data using HttpWebRequest (on Silverlight, using the HTTP POST method) in small blocks, I measure the very small throughput of 500 bytes/s over a "localhost" connection. When sending the data in large blocks, I get 2 MB/s, which is some 5000 times faster. Does anyone know what could cause this incredibly big overhead? Update: I did the performance measurement on both Firefox 3.6 and Internet Explorer 7. Both showed similar results. Update: The Silverlight client-side code I use is essentially my own implementation of the WebClient class. The reason I wrote it is because I noticed the same performance problem with WebClient, and I thought that the HttpWebRequest would allow to tweak the performance issue. Regrettably, this did not work. The implementation is as follows: public class HttpCommChannel { public delegate void ResponseArrivedCallback(object requestContext, BinaryDataBuffer response); public HttpCommChannel(ResponseArrivedCallback responseArrivedCallback) { this.responseArrivedCallback = responseArrivedCallback; this.requestSentEvent = new ManualResetEvent(false); this.responseArrivedEvent = new ManualResetEvent(true); } public void MakeRequest(object requestContext, string url, BinaryDataBuffer requestPacket) { responseArrivedEvent.WaitOne(); responseArrivedEvent.Reset(); this.requestMsg = requestPacket; this.requestContext = requestContext; this.webRequest = WebRequest.Create(url) as HttpWebRequest; this.webRequest.AllowReadStreamBuffering = true; this.webRequest.ContentType = "text/plain"; this.webRequest.Method = "POST"; this.webRequest.BeginGetRequestStream(new AsyncCallback(this.GetRequestStreamCallback), null); this.requestSentEvent.WaitOne(); } void GetRequestStreamCallback(IAsyncResult asynchronousResult) { System.IO.Stream postStream = webRequest.EndGetRequestStream(asynchronousResult); postStream.Write(requestMsg.Data, 0, (int)requestMsg.Size); postStream.Close(); requestSentEvent.Set(); webRequest.BeginGetResponse(new AsyncCallback(this.GetResponseCallback), null); } void GetResponseCallback(IAsyncResult asynchronousResult) { HttpWebResponse response = (HttpWebResponse)webRequest.EndGetResponse(asynchronousResult); Stream streamResponse = response.GetResponseStream(); Dim.Ensure(streamResponse.CanRead); byte[] readData = new byte[streamResponse.Length]; Dim.Ensure(streamResponse.Read(readData, 0, (int)streamResponse.Length) == streamResponse.Length); streamResponse.Close(); response.Close(); webRequest = null; responseArrivedEvent.Set(); responseArrivedCallback(requestContext, new BinaryDataBuffer(readData)); } HttpWebRequest webRequest; ManualResetEvent requestSentEvent; BinaryDataBuffer requestMsg; object requestContext; ManualResetEvent responseArrivedEvent; ResponseArrivedCallback responseArrivedCallback; } I use this code to send data back and forth to an HTTP server.

    Read the article

  • Can we use spring FTL based form validations with any controller other than SimpleFormController

    - by Adhir Aima
    Hi, Because of some design specification we have to extend all controllers in spring MVC from a class that extends AbstractCommandController. I am trying to include the spring FTL based form validations in my FTL file, but it gives me an error like Method public org.springframework.web.servlet.support.BindStatus org.springframework.web.servlet.support.RequestContext.getBindStatus(java.lang.String) throws java.lang.IllegalStateException threw an exception when invoked on org.springframework.web.servlet.support.RequestContext@b05cd7 with arguments of types [java.lang.String,] The problematic instruction: == assignment: status=springMacroRequestContext.getBindStatus(path) [on line 120, column 9 in spring.ftl] in user-directive spring.bind [on line 47, column 33 in myProfile.ftl] Java backtrace for programmers: freemarker.template.TemplateModelException: Method public org.springframework.web.servlet.support.BindStatus org.springframework.web.servlet.support.RequestContext.getBindStatus(java.lang.String) throws java.lang.IllegalStateException threw an exception when invoked on org.springframework.web.servlet.support.RequestContext@b05cd7 with arguments of types [java.lang.String,] I have put the command name properly in the controller class and in the controller class, neither the specified name nor the default "command" works. Some help please. And would be much appreciated if it comes with an example. Thanks in advance, Adhir Aima

    Read the article

  • "Does not implement IControllerFactory.CreateController" in Visual Studio 2010 RC

    - by ripper234
    When compiling this code: public class WindsorControllerFactory : IControllerFactory { private readonly WindsorContainer _container; public WindsorControllerFactory(WindsorContainer container) { _container = container; } public IController CreateController(RequestContext requestContext, string controllerName) { return (IController)_container.Resolve(controllerName); } public void ReleaseController(IController controller) { _container.Release(controller); } } I am getting this error: 'WindsorControllerFactory' does not implement interface member 'System.Web.Mvc.IControllerFactory.CreateController(System.Web.Routing.RequestContext, string)' Well, it obviously implements this member. Has anyone encountered this problem?

    Read the article

  • Python - Compress Ascii String

    - by n0idea
    I'm looking for a way to compress an ascii-based string, any help? I need also need to decompress it. I tried zlib but with no help. What can I do to compress the string into lesser length? code: def compress(request): if request.POST: data = request.POST.get('input') if is_ascii(data): result = zlib.compress(data) return render_to_response('index.html', {'result': result, 'input':data}, context_instance = RequestContext(request)) else: result = "Error, the string is not ascii-based" return render_to_response('index.html', {'result':result}, context_instance = RequestContext(request)) else: return render_to_response('index.html', {}, context_instance = RequestContext(request))

    Read the article

  • Django: automatically import MEDIA_URL in context

    - by pistacchio
    Hi, like exposed here, one can set a MEDIA_URL in settings.py (for example i'm pointing to Amazon S3) and serve the files in the view via {{ MEDIA_URL }}. Since MEDIA_URL is not automatically in the context, one have to manually add it to the context, so, for example, the following works: #views.py from django.shortcuts import render_to_response from django.template import RequestContext def test(request): return render_to_response('test.html', {}, context_instance=RequestContext(request)) This means that in each view.py file i have to add from django.template import RequestContext and in each response i have to explicitly specify context_instance=RequestContext(request). Is there a way to automatically (DRY) add MEDIA_URL to the default context? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9  | Next Page >