Search Results

Search found 21124 results on 845 pages for 'zend framework mvc'.

Page 169/845 | < Previous Page | 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176  | Next Page >

  • Entity Framework: a proxy collection for displaying a subset of data

    - by Jefim
    Imagine I have an entity called Product and a repository for it: public class Product { public int Id { get; set; } public bool IsHidden { get; set; } } public class ProductRepository { public ObservableCollection<Product> AllProducts { get; set; } public ObservableCollection<Product> HiddenProducts { get; set; } } All products contains every single Product in the database, while HiddenProducts must only contain those, whose IsHidden == true. I wrote the type as ObservableCollection<Product>, but it does not have to be that. The goal is to have HiddenProducts collection be like a proxy to AllProducts with filtering capabilities and for it to refresh every time when IsHidden attribute of a Product is changed. Is there a normal way to do this? Or maybe my logic is wrong and this could be done is a better way?

    Read the article

  • How to implement table-per-concrete-type using entity framework

    - by SDReyes
    Hello Guys! I'm mapping a set of tables that share a common set of fields: So as you can see I'm using a table-per-concrete-type strategy to map the inheritance. But... I have not could to relate them to an abstract type containing these common properties. It's possible to do it using EF? BONUS: The only non documented Entity Data Model Mapping Scenario is Table-per-concrete-type inheritance http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc716779.aspx : P

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework: Attached Entities not Saving

    - by blog
    Hello: I can't figure out why calling SaveChanges() on the following code results in no changes to the objects I attached: // delete existing user roles before re-attaching if (accountUser.AccountRoles.Count > 0) { foreach (AccountRole role in accountUser.AccountRoles.ToList()) { accountUser.AccountRoles.Remove(role); } } // get roles to add List<int> roleIDs = new List<int>(); foreach (UserRole r in this.AccountRoles) { roleIDs.Add(r.RoleID); } var roleEntities = from roles in db.AccountRoles where roleIDs.Contains(roles.id) select roles; accountUser.AccountRoles.Attach(roleEntities); db.SaveChanges(); In the debugger, I see that the correct roleEntities are being loaded, and that they are valid objects. However, if I use SQL Profiler I see no UPDATE or INSERT queries coming in, and as a result none of my attached objects are being saved.

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework with SQL Server 2000 (APPLY Operator) issue

    - by How Lun
    Hello, I have a simple Linq query below: var seq = (from n in GetObjects() select n.SomeKey) .Distinct() .Count(); This query works find with SQL Server 2005 and above. But, this start to give headache when I hooked the EF to SQL Server 2000. Because EF is using APPLY operator which only SQL Server 2005 and above can be supported. I do not know why the hell EF is using APPLy operator instead of sub queries. My current work around is: var seq = (from n in GetObjects() select n.SomeKey) .Distinct() .ToList() .Count(); But, I can forsee more problems to come. The above query is just a simple one. Did anyone come across such issue? And how you guys work around it? Or is there a way to force EF not to use APPLY operator? Any help will be very much appreciated. How Lun.

    Read the article

  • Entity framework Update fails when object is linked to a missing child

    - by McKay
    I’m having trouble updating an objects child when the object has a reference to a nonexising child record. eg. Tables Car and CarColor have a relationship. Car.CarColorId CarColor.CarColorId If I load the car with its color record like so this var result = from x in database.Car.Include("CarColor") where x.CarId = 5 select x; I'll get back the Car object and it’s Color object. Now suppose that some time ago a CarColor had been deleted but the Car record in question still contains the CarColorId value. So when I run the query the Color object is null because the CarColor record didn’t exist. My problem here is that when I attach another Color object that does exist I get a Store update, insert error when saving. Car.Color = newColor Database.SaveChanges(); It’s like the context is trying to delete the nonexisting color. How can I get around this?

    Read the article

  • How to retrieve base class only (entity framework)?

    - by Juvaly
    Hi All, I've been scratching my head here for a while now... I have a Consumer class and a BillableConsumer class that inherits Consumer. They are both a part of the Consumers set. The problem is that this following query: Consumer consumer = (from c in _ctx.Consumers where c.ID = id select c).First(); returns a BillableConsumer instance! Just the same as this query: BillableConsumer bconsumer = (from c in _ctx.Consumers.OfType<BillableConsumer>() where c.ID = id select c).First(); How can I return an instance of just the base class? (these are separate tables in the data store).

    Read the article

  • How to handle Foreign Keys with Entity Framework

    - by Jack Marchetti
    I have two entities. Groups. Pools. A Group can create many pools. So I setup my Pool table to have a GroupID foreign key. My code: using (entity _db = new entity()) { Pool p = new Pool(); p.Name = "test"; p.Group.ID = "5"; _db.AddToPool(p); } This doesn't work. I get a null reference exception on p.Group. How do I go about creating a new "Pool" and associating a GroupID?

    Read the article

  • .NET Compact Framework app that will run on both Professional and Standard

    - by CJCraft.com
    Is there any guidance on creating apps that will run on both professional (touch-screen) and standard (non-touch-screen) devices. I have a simple application that is mostly text and buttons that in theory should be able to run on both professional and standard devices with little if any modification. It seems the IDE wants to make this hard to impossible, but I expect it to be possible. Any advice?

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework 4 and 0:1, 0:1 relationships

    - by Eric J.
    I'm using the Model First approach with EF 4 and hit a snag with two tables, Participant (singular because pre-existing from another app) and ActiveParticipants. A Participant may or may not be associated with exactly one ActiveParticipant and vice versa. When I create an association, everything seems to go well on the surface, but then I get a runtime error complaining that Participant does not contain the column ActiveParticipant_Id. It does contain a column ActiveParticipantId (no underscore). When I view the diagram as XML, there's a line like this: <Property Name="ActiveParticipant_Id" Type="uniqueidentifier" Nullable="true" /> Why is it adding an underscore? Is there anything special I need to do for 0:1, 0:1 relationships?

    Read the article

  • Left Join with Entity Framework

    - by sanfra1983
    hi, someone can tell me how to do this query in EF1: select a.idAnimali, a.titolo, a.commenti, a.ordine, a.idcatanimali, table1.nomefoto FROM tabanimali as a LEFT JOIN (SELECT idanimali, nomefoto tabfotoanimali FROM LIMIT 1) AS Table1 On a.idAnimali = table1.idanimali WHERE a.idcatanimali = idcatanimale Thanks

    Read the article

  • What is the difference between these two statements (asp.net/c#/entity framework)

    - by user318573
    IEnumerable<Department> myQuery = (from D in myContext.Departments orderby D.DeptName select D); var myQuery = (from D in myContext.Departments orderby D.DeptName select D); What is the difference between these two statements above? In my little asp.net/C#/ EF4.0 app I can write them either way, and as far as how I want to use them, they both work, but there has to be a reason why I would choose one over the other?

    Read the article

  • Does Entity Framework saves related classes automatically?

    - by herbatnic
    Let's assume that we have such classes public class A{ string someField { get; set; } public virtual B B {get; set; } } public class B { int someIntField {get; set; } [ForeignKey("Id")] [Required] public virtual A A { get; set; } } In code I create new instances for both of them and making relation like: A a = new A () { someField = "abcd"}; B b = new B () { someIntField = 42 }; A.B = b; B.A = a; Should I using DBContext to save both classes like that: using (var db = new myDbContext()) { myDbContext.As.Add(A); myDbContext.Bs.Add(B); myDBContext.SaveChanges(); } Or saving it like that: using (var db = new myDbContext()) { myDbContext.As.Add(A); myDbContext.SaveChanges(); } is enough to store related objects into database?

    Read the article

  • multiple join query in entity framework

    - by gvLearner
    I have following tables tasks id | name | proj_id 1 | task1 | 1 2 | task2 | 1 3 | task3 | 1 projects id | name 1 | sample proj1 2 | demo project budget_versions id | version_name| proj_id 1 | 50 | 1 budgets id | cost | budget_version_id | task_id 1 | 3000 | 1 | 2 2 | 5000 | 1 | 1 I need to join these tables to get a result as below task_id | task_name | project_id | budget_version | budget_id | cost 1 | task1 | 1 | 1 | 2 |5000 2 | task2 | 1 | 1 | 1 |3000 3 | task3 | 1 | NULL | NULL |NULL select tsk.id,tsk.name, tsk.project_id, bgtver.id, bgt.id, bgt.cost from TASK tsk left outer join BUDGET_VERSIONS bgtver on tsk.project_id= bgtver.project_id left outer join BUDGETS bgt on bgtver.id = bgt.budget_version_id and tsk.id = bgt.task_id where bgtver.id = 1

    Read the article

  • Architecture Guide: ASP.NET MVC + N-tier + Entity Framework and Many More

    If you want to use ASP.NET MVC but is strugling to get things arrange to confidently use for your next business project. This Article is just for you. The article guide you to use ASP.NET MVC to architect a small Document Management System....Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET in Moscow!

    - by Stephen Walther
    I’m traveling to Russia and speaking in Moscow next week at the DevConf. This will be the first time that I have visited Russia, and I know that there is a strong ASP.NET community in Russia, so I am very excited about the trip. I’m speaking at the DevConf (http://www.devconf.ru/). I don’t speak Russian, so the only words that I recognize off the home page of the conference website are ASP.NET and JavaScript (PHP, Perl, Python, and Ruby must be Russian words). I’m giving talks on both ASP.NET Web Forms and ASP.NET MVC: What’s New in ASP.NET 4 Web Forms Learn about the new features just released with ASP.NET 4 Web Forms and Visual Studio 2010 that enable you to be more productive and build better websites. Learn how to take control of your markup, client IDs, and view state. Learn how to take advantage of routing with Web Forms to make your websites more search engine friendly.   What’s New in ASP.NET MVC 2 Come learn about the new features being introduced with ASP.NET MVC 2. Templated helpers allow associating edit and display elements with data types automatically. Areas provide a means of dividing a large Web application into multiple projects. Data annotations allows attaching metadata attributes on a model to control validation. Client validation enables form field validation without the need to perform a roundtrip to the server. Learn how these new features enable you to be more productive when building ASP.NET MVC applications. Hope to see you at the conference next week!

    Read the article

  • Generating EF Code First model classes from an existing database

    - by Jon Galloway
    Entity Framework Code First is a lightweight way to "turn on" data access for a simple CLR class. As the name implies, the intended use is that you're writing the code first and thinking about the database later. However, I really like the Entity Framework Code First works, and I want to use it in existing projects and projects with pre-existing databases. For example, MVC Music Store comes with a SQL Express database that's pre-loaded with a catalog of music (including genres, artists, and songs), and while it may eventually make sense to load that seed data from a different source, for the MVC 3 release we wanted to keep using the existing database. While I'm not getting the full benefit of Code First - writing code which drives the database schema - I can still benefit from the simplicity of the lightweight code approach. Scott Guthrie blogged about how to use entity framework with an existing database, looking at how you can override the Entity Framework Code First conventions so that it can work with a database which was created following other conventions. That gives you the information you need to create the model classes manually. However, it turns out that with Entity Framework 4 CTP 5, there's a way to generate the model classes from the database schema. Once the grunt work is done, of course, you can go in and modify the model classes as you'd like, but you can save the time and frustration of figuring out things like mapping SQL database types to .NET types. Note that this template requires Entity Framework 4 CTP 5 or later. You can install EF 4 CTP 5 here. Step One: Generate an EF Model from your existing database The code generation system in Entity Framework works from a model. You can add a model to your existing project and delete it when you're done, but I think it's simpler to just spin up a separate project to generate the model classes. When you're done, you can delete the project without affecting your application, or you may choose to keep it around in case you have other database schema updates which require model changes. I chose to add the Model classes to the Models folder of a new MVC 3 application. Right-click the folder and select "Add / New Item..."   Next, select ADO.NET Entity Data Model from the Data Templates list, and name it whatever you want (the name is unimportant).   Next, select "Generate from database." This is important - it's what kicks off the next few steps, which read your database's schema.   Now it's time to point the Entity Data Model Wizard at your existing database. I'll assume you know how to find your database - if not, I covered that a bit in the MVC Music Store tutorial section on Models and Data. Select your database, uncheck the "Save entity connection settings in Web.config" (since we won't be using them within the application), and click Next.   Now you can select the database objects you'd like modeled. I just selected all tables and clicked Finish.   And there's your model. If you want, you can make additional changes here before going on to generate the code.   Step Two: Add the DbContext Generator Like most code generation systems in Visual Studio lately, Entity Framework uses T4 templates which allow for some control over how the code is generated. K Scott Allen wrote a detailed article on T4 Templates and the Entity Framework on MSDN recently, if you'd like to know more. Fortunately for us, there's already a template that does just what we need without any customization. Right-click a blank space in the Entity Framework model surface and select "Add Code Generation Item..." Select the Code groupt in the Installed Templates section and pick the ADO.NET DbContext Generator. If you don't see this listed, make sure you've got EF 4 CTP 5 installed and that you're looking at the Code templates group. Note that the DbContext Generator template is similar to the EF POCO template which came out last year, but with "fix up" code (unnecessary in EF Code First) removed.   As soon as you do this, you'll two terrifying Security Warnings - unless you click the "Do not show this message again" checkbox the first time. It will also be displayed (twice) every time you rebuild the project, so I checked the box and no immediate harm befell my computer (fingers crossed!).   Here's the payoff: two templates (filenames ending with .tt) have been added to the project, and they've generated the code I needed.   The "MusicStoreEntities.Context.tt" template built a DbContext class which holds the entity collections, and the "MusicStoreEntities.tt" template build a separate class for each table I selected earlier. We'll customize them in the next step. I recommend copying all the generated .cs files into your application at this point, since accidentally rebuilding the generation project will overwrite your changes if you leave them there. Step Three: Modify and use your POCO entity classes Note: I made a bunch of tweaks to my POCO classes after they were generated. You don't have to do any of this, but I think it's important that you can - they're your classes, and EF Code First respects that. Modify them as you need for your application, or don't. The Context class derives from DbContext, which is what turns on the EF Code First features. It holds a DbSet for each entity. Think of DbSet as a simple List, but with Entity Framework features turned on.   //------------------------------------------------------------------------------ // <auto-generated> // This code was generated from a template. // // Changes to this file may cause incorrect behavior and will be lost if // the code is regenerated. // </auto-generated> //------------------------------------------------------------------------------ namespace EF_CodeFirst_From_Existing_Database.Models { using System; using System.Data.Entity; public partial class Entities : DbContext { public Entities() : base("name=Entities") { } public DbSet<Album> Albums { get; set; } public DbSet<Artist> Artists { get; set; } public DbSet<Cart> Carts { get; set; } public DbSet<Genre> Genres { get; set; } public DbSet<OrderDetail> OrderDetails { get; set; } public DbSet<Order> Orders { get; set; } } } It's a pretty lightweight class as generated, so I just took out the comments, set the namespace, removed the constructor, and formatted it a bit. Done. If I wanted, though, I could have added or removed DbSets, overridden conventions, etc. using System.Data.Entity; namespace MvcMusicStore.Models { public class MusicStoreEntities : DbContext { public DbSet Albums { get; set; } public DbSet Genres { get; set; } public DbSet Artists { get; set; } public DbSet Carts { get; set; } public DbSet Orders { get; set; } public DbSet OrderDetails { get; set; } } } Next, it's time to look at the individual classes. Some of mine were pretty simple - for the Cart class, I just need to remove the header and clean up the namespace. //------------------------------------------------------------------------------ // // This code was generated from a template. // // Changes to this file may cause incorrect behavior and will be lost if // the code is regenerated. // //------------------------------------------------------------------------------ namespace EF_CodeFirst_From_Existing_Database.Models { using System; using System.Collections.Generic; public partial class Cart { // Primitive properties public int RecordId { get; set; } public string CartId { get; set; } public int AlbumId { get; set; } public int Count { get; set; } public System.DateTime DateCreated { get; set; } // Navigation properties public virtual Album Album { get; set; } } } I did a bit more customization on the Album class. Here's what was generated: //------------------------------------------------------------------------------ // // This code was generated from a template. // // Changes to this file may cause incorrect behavior and will be lost if // the code is regenerated. // //------------------------------------------------------------------------------ namespace EF_CodeFirst_From_Existing_Database.Models { using System; using System.Collections.Generic; public partial class Album { public Album() { this.Carts = new HashSet(); this.OrderDetails = new HashSet(); } // Primitive properties public int AlbumId { get; set; } public int GenreId { get; set; } public int ArtistId { get; set; } public string Title { get; set; } public decimal Price { get; set; } public string AlbumArtUrl { get; set; } // Navigation properties public virtual Artist Artist { get; set; } public virtual Genre Genre { get; set; } public virtual ICollection Carts { get; set; } public virtual ICollection OrderDetails { get; set; } } } I removed the header, changed the namespace, and removed some of the navigation properties. One nice thing about EF Code First is that you don't have to have a property for each database column or foreign key. In the Music Store sample, for instance, we build the app up using code first and start with just a few columns, adding in fields and navigation properties as the application needs them. EF Code First handles the columsn we've told it about and doesn't complain about the others. Here's the basic class: using System.ComponentModel; using System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations; using System.Web.Mvc; using System.Collections.Generic; namespace MvcMusicStore.Models { public class Album { public int AlbumId { get; set; } public int GenreId { get; set; } public int ArtistId { get; set; } public string Title { get; set; } public decimal Price { get; set; } public string AlbumArtUrl { get; set; } public virtual Genre Genre { get; set; } public virtual Artist Artist { get; set; } public virtual List OrderDetails { get; set; } } } It's my class, not Entity Framework's, so I'm free to do what I want with it. I added a bunch of MVC 3 annotations for scaffolding and validation support, as shown below: using System.ComponentModel; using System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations; using System.Web.Mvc; using System.Collections.Generic; namespace MvcMusicStore.Models { [Bind(Exclude = "AlbumId")] public class Album { [ScaffoldColumn(false)] public int AlbumId { get; set; } [DisplayName("Genre")] public int GenreId { get; set; } [DisplayName("Artist")] public int ArtistId { get; set; } [Required(ErrorMessage = "An Album Title is required")] [StringLength(160)] public string Title { get; set; } [Required(ErrorMessage = "Price is required")] [Range(0.01, 100.00, ErrorMessage = "Price must be between 0.01 and 100.00")] public decimal Price { get; set; } [DisplayName("Album Art URL")] [StringLength(1024)] public string AlbumArtUrl { get; set; } public virtual Genre Genre { get; set; } public virtual Artist Artist { get; set; } public virtual List<OrderDetail> OrderDetails { get; set; } } } The end result was that I had working EF Code First model code for the finished application. You can follow along through the tutorial to see how I built up to the finished model classes, starting with simple 2-3 property classes and building up to the full working schema. Thanks to Diego Vega (on the Entity Framework team) for pointing me to the DbContext template.

    Read the article

  • Spring 3.0: Handler mapping issue

    - by Yaniv Cohen
    I am having a trouble mapping a specific URL request to one of the controllers in my project. the URL is : http://HOSTNAME/api/v1/profiles.json the war which is deployed is: api.war the error I get is the following: [PageNotFound] No mapping found for HTTP request with URI [/api/v1/profiles.json] in DispatcherServlet with name 'action' The configuration I have is the following: web.xml : <context-param> <param-name>contextConfigLocation</param-name> <param-value>/WEB-INF/applicationContext.xml,/WEB-INF/applicationContext-security.xml</param-value> </context-param> <!-- Cache Control filter --> <filter> <filter-name>cacheControlFilter</filter-name> <filter-class>org.springframework.web.filter.DelegatingFilterProxy</filter-class> </filter> <!-- Cache Control filter mapping --> <filter-mapping> <filter-name>cacheControlFilter</filter-name> <url-pattern>/*</url-pattern> </filter-mapping> <!-- Spring security filter --> <filter> <filter-name>springSecurityFilterChain</filter-name> <filter-class>org.springframework.web.filter.DelegatingFilterProxy</filter-class> </filter> <!-- Spring security filter mapping --> <filter-mapping> <filter-name>springSecurityFilterChain</filter-name> <url-pattern>/*</url-pattern> </filter-mapping> <!-- Spring listener --> <listener> <listener-class>org.springframework.web.context.ContextLoaderListener</listener-class> </listener> <!-- Spring Controller --> <servlet> <servlet-name>action</servlet-name> <servlet-class>org.springframework.web.servlet.DispatcherServlet</servlet-class> <load-on-startup>1</load-on-startup> </servlet> <servlet-mapping> <servlet-name>action</servlet-name> <url-pattern>/v1/*</url-pattern> </servlet-mapping> The action-servlet.xml: <mvc:annotation-driven/> <bean id="contentNegotiatingViewResolver" class="org.springframework.web.servlet.view.ContentNegotiatingViewResolver"> <property name="favorPathExtension" value="true" /> <property name="favorParameter" value="true" /> <!-- default media format parameter name is 'format' --> <property name="ignoreAcceptHeader" value="false" /> <property name="order" value="1" /> <property name="mediaTypes"> <map> <entry key="html" value="text/html"/> <entry key="json" value="application/json" /> <entry key="xml" value="application/xml" /> </map> </property> <property name="viewResolvers"> <list> <bean class="org.springframework.web.servlet.view.InternalResourceViewResolver"> <property name="prefix" value="/WEB-INF/jsp/"/> <property name="suffix" value=".jsp"/> <property name="viewClass" value="org.springframework.web.servlet.view.JstlView" /> </bean> </list> </property> <property name="defaultViews"> <list> <bean class="org.springframework.web.servlet.view.json.MappingJacksonJsonView" /> <bean class="org.springframework.web.servlet.view.xml.MarshallingView"> <constructor-arg> <bean class="org.springframework.oxm.xstream.XStreamMarshaller" /> </constructor-arg> </bean> </list> </property> </bean> the application context security: <sec:http auto-config='true' > <sec:intercept-url pattern="/login.*" filters="none"/> <sec:intercept-url pattern="/oauth/**" access="ROLE_USER" /> <sec:intercept-url pattern="/v1/**" access="ROLE_USER" /> <sec:intercept-url pattern="/request_token_authorized.jsp" access="ROLE_USER" /> <sec:intercept-url pattern="/**" access="ROLE_USER"/> <sec:form-login authentication-failure-url ="/login.html" default-target-url ="/login.html" login-page ="/login.html" login-processing-url ="/login.html" /> <sec:logout logout-success-url="/index.html" logout-url="/logout.html" /> </sec:http> the controller: @Controller public class ProfilesController { @RequestMapping(value = {"/v1/profiles"}, method = {RequestMethod.GET,RequestMethod.POST}) public void getProfilesList(@ModelAttribute("response") Response response) { .... } } the request never reaches this controller. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • How to avoid big and clumpsy UITableViewController on iOS?

    - by Johan Karlsson
    I have a problem when implementing the MVC-pattern on iOS. I have searched the Internet but seems not to find any nice solution to this problem. Many UITableViewController implementations seems to be rather big. Most example I have seen lets the UITableViewController implement UITableViewDelegate and UITableViewDataSource. These implementations are a big reason why UITableViewControlleris getting big. One solution would be to create separate classes that implements UITableViewDelegate and UITableViewDataSource. Of course these classes would have to have a reference to the UITableViewController. Are there any drawbacks using this solution? In general I think you should delegate the functionality to other "Helper" classes or similar, using the delegate pattern. Are there any well established ways of solving this problem? I do not want the model to contain to much functionality, nor the view. A believe that the logic should really be in the controller class, since this is one of the cornerstones of the MVC-pattern. But the big question is; How should you divide the controller of a MVC-implementation into smaller manageable pieces? (Applies to MVC in iOS in this case) There might be a general pattern for solving this, although I am specifically looking for a solution for iOS. Please give an example of a good pattern for solving this issue. Also an argument why this solution is awesome.

    Read the article

  • A good substitute for ASMX web service methods, but not a general handler

    - by Saeed Neamati
    The best thing I like about ASP.NET MVC, is that you can directly call a server method (called action), from the client. This is so convenient, and so straightforward, that I really like to implement such a model in ASP.NET WebForms too. However, in ASP.NET WebForms, to call a server method from the client, you should either use Page Methods, or Web Services, both of which use SOAP as their communication protocol (though JSON can also be used). There is also another substitution, which is using Generic Handlers. The problem with them however is that, a separate Generic Handler should be written for each server method. In other words, each Generic Handler works like a simple method. Is there anyway else to imitate MVC model in ASP.NET WebForms? Please note that I can't change to MVC platform right now, cause the project at our hand is a big project and we don't have required resources and time to change our platform. What we seek, is a simple MVC model implementation for our AJAX calls. A problem that we have with Web Services, is the known problem of SoapException, and we're not interested in creating custom SoapExctensions.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176  | Next Page >