Search Results

Search found 140 results on 6 pages for 'decorated'.

Page 2/6 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6  | Next Page >

  • Using SiteMesh with RequestDispatcher's forward()

    - by Rob Hruska
    I'm attempting to integrate SiteMesh into a legacy application using Tomcat 5 as my a container. I have a main.jsp that I'm decorating with a simple decorator. In decorators.xml, I've just got one decorator defined: <decorators defaultdir="/decorators"> <decorator name="layout-main" page="layout-main.jsp"> <pattern>/jsp/main.jsp</pattern> </decorator> </decorators> This decorator works if I manually go to http://example.com/my-webapp/jsp/main.jsp. However, there are a few places where a servlet, instead of doing a redirect to a jsp, does a forward: getServletContext().getRequestDispatcher("/jsp/main.jsp").forward(request, response); This means that the URL remains at something like http://example.com/my-webapp/servlet/MyServlet instead of the jsp file and is therefore not being decorated, I presume since it doesn't match the pattern in decorators.xml. I can't do a <pattern>/*</pattern> because there are other jsps that do not need to be decorated by layout-main.jsp. I can't do a <pattern>/servlet/MyServlet*</pattern> because MyServlet may forward to main.jsp sometimes and perhaps error.jsp at other times. Is there a way to work around this without expansive changes to how the servlets work? Since it's a legacy app I don't have as much freedom to change things, so I'm hoping for something configuration-wise that will fix this. SiteMesh's documentation really isn't that great. I've been working mostly off the example application that comes with the distribution. I really like SiteMesh, and am hoping I can get it to work in this case.

    Read the article

  • Question about decorator pattern and the abstract decorator class?

    - by es11
    This question was asked already here, but rather than answering the specific question, descriptions of how the decorator pattern works were given instead. I'd like to ask it again because the answer is not immediately evident to me just by reading how the decorator pattern works (I've read the wikipedia article and the section in the book Head First Design Patterns). Basically, I want to know why an abstract decorator class must be created which implements (or extends) some interface (or abstract class). Why can't all the new "decorated classes" simply implement (or extend) the base abstract object themselves (instead of extending the abstract decorator class)? To make this more concrete I'll use the example from the design patterns book dealing with coffee beverages: There is an abstract component class called Beverage Simple beverage types such as HouseBlend simply extend Beverage To decorate beverage, an abstract CondimentDecorator class is created which extends Beverage and has an instance of Beverage Say we want to add a "milk" condiment, a class Milk is created which extends CondimentDecorator I'd like to understand why we needed the CondimentDecorator class and why the class Milk couldn't have simply extended the Beverage class itself and been passed an instance of Beverage in its constructor. Hopefully this is clear...if not I'd simply like to know why is the abstract decorator class necessary for this pattern? Thanks. Edit: I tried to implement this, omitting the abstract decorator class, and it seems to still work. Is this abstract class present in all descriptions of this pattern simply because it provides a standard interface for all of the new decorated classes?

    Read the article

  • Is this a good decorator pattern for javascript?

    - by Kucebe
    I need some simple objects that could become more complex later, with many different properties, so i thought to decorator pattern. I made this looking at Crockford's power constructor and object augmentation: //add property to object Object.prototype.addProperty = function(name, func){ for(propertyName in this){ if(propertyName == name){ throw new Error(propertyName + " is already defined"); } } this[name] = func; }; //constructor of base object var BaseConstructor = function(param){ var _privateVar = param; return{ getPrivateVar: function(){ return _privateVar; } }; }; //a simple decorator, adds one private attribute and one privileged method var simpleDecorator = function(obj, param){ var _privateVar = param; var privilegedMethod1 = function(){ return "privateVar of decorator is: " + _privateVar; }; obj.addProperty("privilegedMethod1", privilegedMethod1); return obj; } //a more complex decorator, adds public and private properties var complexDecorator = function(obj, param1, param2){ //private properties var _privateVar = param1; var _privateMethod = function(x){ for(var i=0; i<x; i++){ _privateVar += x; } return _privateVar; }; //public properties var publicVar = "I'm public"; obj.addProperty("publicVar", publicVar); var privilegedMethod2 = function(){ return _privateMethod(param2); }; obj.addProperty("privilegedMethod2", privilegedMethod2); var publicMethod = function(){ var temp = this.privilegedMethod2(); return "do something: " + temp + " - publicVar is: " + this.publicVar; }; obj.addProperty("publicMethod", publicMethod); return obj; } //new basic object var myObj = BaseConstructor("obj1"); //the basic object will be decorated var myObj = simpleDecorator(obj, "aParam"); //the basic object will be decorated with other properties var myObj = complexDecorator(obj, 2, 3); Is this a good way to have Decorator Pattern in javascript? Are there other better ways to do this?

    Read the article

  • How to replace auto-implemented c# get body at runtime or compile time?

    - by qstarin
    I've been trying to figure this out all night, but I guess my knowledge of the .Net Framework just isn't that deep and the problem doesn't exactly Google well, but if I can get a nod in the right direction I'm sure I can implement it, one way or another. I'd like to be able to declare a property decorated with a custom attribute as such: public MyClass { [ReplaceWithExpressionFrom(typeof(SomeOtherClass))] public virtual bool MyProperty { get; } } public SomeOtherClass : IExpressionHolder<MyClass, bool> { ... } public interface IExpressionHolder<TArg, TResult> { Expression<Func<TArg, TResult>> Expression { get; } } And then somehow - this is the part I'm having trouble figuring - replace the automatically generated implementation of that getter with a piece of custom code, something like: Type expressionHolderType = LookupAttributeCtorArgTypeInDeclarationOfPropertyWereReplacing(); return ReplaceWithExpressionFromAttribute.GetCompiledExpressionFrom(expressionHolderType)(this); The main thing I'm not sure how to do is replace the automatic implementation of the get. The first thing that came to mind was PostSharp, but that's a more complicated dependency than I care for. I'd much prefer a way to code it without using post-processing attached to the build (I think that's the jist of how PostSharp sinks its hooks in anyway). The other part of this I'm not so sure about is how to retrieve the type parameter passed to the particular instantiation of the ReplaceWithExpressionFrom attribute (where it decorates the property whose body I want to replace; in other words, how do I get typeof(SomeOtherClass) where I'm coding the get body replacement). I plan to cache compiled expressions from concrete instances of IExpressionHolder, as I don't want to do that every time the property gets retrieved. I figure this has just got to be possible. At the very least I figure I should be able to search an assembly for any method decorated with the attribute and somehow proxy the class or just replace the IL or .. something? And I'd like to make the integration as smooth as possible, so if this can be done without explicitly calling a registration or initialization method somewhere that'd be super great. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Why does decorating a class break the descriptor protocol, thus preventing staticmethod objects from behaving as expected?

    - by Robru
    I need a little bit of help understanding the subtleties of the descriptor protocol in Python, as it relates specifically to the behavior of staticmethod objects. I'll start with a trivial example, and then iteratively expand it, examining it's behavior at each step: class Stub: @staticmethod def do_things(): """Call this like Stub.do_things(), with no arguments or instance.""" print "Doing things!" At this point, this behaves as expected, but what's going on here is a bit subtle: When you call Stub.do_things(), you are not invoking do_things directly. Instead, Stub.do_things refers to a staticmethod instance, which has wrapped the function we want up inside it's own descriptor protocol such that you are actually invoking staticmethod.__get__, which first returns the function that we want, and then gets called afterwards. >>> Stub <class __main__.Stub at 0x...> >>> Stub.do_things <function do_things at 0x...> >>> Stub.__dict__['do_things'] <staticmethod object at 0x...> >>> Stub.do_things() Doing things! So far so good. Next, I need to wrap the class in a decorator that will be used to customize class instantiation -- the decorator will determine whether to allow new instantiations or provide cached instances: def deco(cls): def factory(*args, **kwargs): # pretend there is some logic here determining # whether to make a new instance or not return cls(*args, **kwargs) return factory @deco class Stub: @staticmethod def do_things(): """Call this like Stub.do_things(), with no arguments or instance.""" print "Doing things!" Now, naturally this part as-is would be expected to break staticmethods, because the class is now hidden behind it's decorator, ie, Stub not a class at all, but an instance of factory that is able to produce instances of Stub when you call it. Indeed: >>> Stub <function factory at 0x...> >>> Stub.do_things Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module> AttributeError: 'function' object has no attribute 'do_things' >>> Stub() <__main__.Stub instance at 0x...> >>> Stub().do_things <function do_things at 0x...> >>> Stub().do_things() Doing things! So far I understand what's happening here. My goal is to restore the ability for staticmethods to function as you would expect them to, even though the class is wrapped. As luck would have it, the Python stdlib includes something called functools, which provides some tools just for this purpose, ie, making functions behave more like other functions that they wrap. So I change my decorator to look like this: def deco(cls): @functools.wraps(cls) def factory(*args, **kwargs): # pretend there is some logic here determining # whether to make a new instance or not return cls(*args, **kwargs) return factory Now, things start to get interesting: >>> Stub <function Stub at 0x...> >>> Stub.do_things <staticmethod object at 0x...> >>> Stub.do_things() Traceback (most recent call last): File "<stdin>", line 1, in <module> TypeError: 'staticmethod' object is not callable >>> Stub() <__main__.Stub instance at 0x...> >>> Stub().do_things <function do_things at 0x...> >>> Stub().do_things() Doing things! Wait.... what? functools copies the staticmethod over to the wrapping function, but it's not callable? Why not? What did I miss here? I was playing around with this for a bit and I actually came up with my own reimplementation of staticmethod that allows it to function in this situation, but I don't really understand why it was necessary or if this is even the best solution to this problem. Here's the complete example: class staticmethod(object): """Make @staticmethods play nice with decorated classes.""" def __init__(self, func): self.func = func def __call__(self, *args, **kwargs): """Provide the expected behavior inside decorated classes.""" return self.func(*args, **kwargs) def __get__(self, obj, objtype=None): """Re-implement the standard behavior for undecorated classes.""" return self.func def deco(cls): @functools.wraps(cls) def factory(*args, **kwargs): # pretend there is some logic here determining # whether to make a new instance or not return cls(*args, **kwargs) return factory @deco class Stub: @staticmethod def do_things(): """Call this like Stub.do_things(), with no arguments or instance.""" print "Doing things!" Indeed it works exactly as expected: >>> Stub <function Stub at 0x...> >>> Stub.do_things <__main__.staticmethod object at 0x...> >>> Stub.do_things() Doing things! >>> Stub() <__main__.Stub instance at 0x...> >>> Stub().do_things <function do_things at 0x...> >>> Stub().do_things() Doing things! What approach would you take to make a staticmethod behave as expected inside a decorated class? Is this the best way? Why doesn't the builtin staticmethod implement __call__ on it's own in order for this to just work without any fuss? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Umbraco Developer 's Christmas Office :)

    - by Vizioz Limited
    This weekend my colleague and I decided it was a good idea to decorate our office for Christmas, it's quite difficult to actually photograph it to it's full effect, but you'll have to take our word for it, it looks pretty Christmasy :) We have a 7' Tree covered in lights and decorations, lights around our PC's, tinsel everywhere we could fit it, and even large snow flakes hanging from the ceiling..You'd think we have no work on, but if fact it's the opposite we're manically busy! But hey, it's a bit of fun and it seems to be cheering everyone up in this otherwise rather Dull Regus Serviced Office ;-)We can definitely recommend doing something a bit different, as it's got us noticed and we've already won enough extra work from companies in the building to pay for our office for a year, not bad :)So here's a photo of our office, has anyone else decorated their office? I'd be happy to update this post with any good Christmas office photos that you send me!Happy Christmas all!Chris

    Read the article

  • how to enable layout in XmlHttpReeuqest in symfony

    - by celalo
    Symfony detects if it receives a XmlHttpRequest and automatically turns off your debug bar and layout. However I'd like to have the response decorated with a specified layout. Also I don't want to add custom line of code in the [FONT=Courier]action[/FONT] to enable the layout, I wish I can just make a configuration through yml files. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Python class decorator and maximum recursion depth exceeded

    - by Michal Lula
    I try define class decorator. I have problem with __init__ method in decorated class. If __init__ method invokes super the RuntimeError maximum recursion depth exceeded is raised. Code example: def decorate(cls): class NewClass(cls): pass return NewClass @decorate class Foo(object): def __init__(self, *args, **kwargs): super(Foo, self).__init__(*args, **kwargs) What I doing wrong? Thanks, Michal

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC AcceptVerbs and registering routes

    - by Pure.Krome
    Hi Folks, do I have to register the HttpVerb constraint in my route definition (when i'm registering routes) if i have decorated my action method with the [AcceptVerbs(..)] attribute already? eg. i have this. [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] public ActionResult Create(FormCollection formCollection) { .. } do i need to add this to the route that refers to this action, as a constraint?

    Read the article

  • Flex URLRequest and .NET authorization

    - by user252160
    can I make role based authorization when sending requests to an ASP.NET MVC backend system. I am calling action methods and expecting JSON results, however, some action methods are decorated with the [Authorize] attribute, others require some role privileges to be present. I certainly hope that passing authorization data with every request is possible

    Read the article

  • firefox extension help

    - by Thomas
    Hi all, I am developing a firefox extension which needs to add some html on the page it runs. This element I will be writing needs to be decorated with css and also load some images. I have both the css file and the images in the plugin, but I do not know how to reference them. Do I need to insert the css file to the page I want to modify? In the css file how can I reference the images that are in the extensions? Thanks

    Read the article

  • DavCInt User Agent and Options Verb Requests

    - by beckelmw
    We are getting quite a few errors in our logs where the user agent is DavCInt and verb is OPTIONS. Does anyone know who/what might be making this type of request? We are using ASP.NET MVC and all of our controller actions are decorated with HttpGet or HttpPost as appropriate so a controller supporting the request is of course not found. I know I can deny verbs in the web.config but I am looking for any insight before I do so.

    Read the article

  • add a decorate function to a class

    - by wiso
    I have a decorated function (simplified version): class Memoize: def __init__(self, function): self.function = function self.memoized = {} def __call__(self, *args, **kwds): hash = args try: return self.memoized[hash] except KeyError: self.memoized[hash] = self.function(*args) return self.memoized[hash] @Memoize def _DrawPlot(self, options): do something... now I want to add this method to a pre-esisting class. ROOT.TChain.DrawPlot = _DrawPlot when I call this method: chain = TChain() chain.DrawPlot(opts) I got: self.memoized[hash] = self.function(*args) TypeError: _DrawPlot() takes exactly 2 arguments (1 given) why doesn't it propagate self?

    Read the article

  • How to infer the type of a derived class in base class?

    - by enzi
    I want to create a method that allows me to change arbitrary properties of classes that derive from my base class, the result should look like this: SetPropertyValue("size.height", 50); – where size is a property of my derived class and height is a property of size. I'm almost done with my implementation but there's one final obstacle that I want to solve before moving on, to describe this I will first have to explain my implementation a bit: Properties that can be modified are decorated with an attribute There's a method in my base class that searches for all derived classes and their decorated properties For each property I generate a "property modifier", a class that contains 2 delegates: one to set and one to get the value of the property. Property Modifiers are stored in a dictionary, with the name of the property as key In my base class, there is another dictionary that contains all property-modifier-dictionaries, with the Type of the respective class as key. What the SetPropertyValue method does is this: Get the correct property-modifier-dictionary, using the concrete type of the derived class (<- yet to solve) Get the property modifier of the property to change (e.g. of the property size) Use the get or set delegate to modify the property's value Some example code to clarify further: private static Dictionary<RuntimeTypeHandle, object> EditableTypes; //property-modifier-dictionary protected void SetPropertyValue<T>(EditablePropertyMap<T> map, string property, object value) { var property = map[property]; // get the property modifier property.Set((T)this, value); // use the set delegate (encapsulated in a method) } In the above code, T is the Type of the actual (derived) class. I need this type for the get/set delegates. The problem is how to get the EditablePropertyMap<T> when I don't know what T is. My current (ugly) solution is to pass the map in an overriden virtual method in the derived class: public override void SetPropertyValue(string property, object value) { base.SetPropertyValue((EditablePropertyMap<ExampleType>)EditableTypes[typeof(ExampleType)], property, value); } What this does is: get the correct dictionary containing the property modifiers of this class using the class's type, cast it to the appropiate type and pass it to the SetPropertyValue method. I want to get rid of the SetPropertyValue method in my derived class (since there are a lot of derived classes), but don't know yet how to accomplish that. I cannot just make a virtual GetEditablePropertyMap<T> method because I cannot infer a concrete type for T then. I also cannot acces my dictionary directly with a type and retrieve an EditablePropertyMap<T> from it because I cannot cast to it from object in the base class, since again I do not know T. I found some neat tricks to infere types (e.g. by adding a dummy T parameter), but cannot apply them to my specific problem. I'd highly appreciate any suggestions you may have for me.

    Read the article

  • Does there exists a method to render an object using DebuggerDisplayAttribute

    - by Joe
    I have a number of classes that are decorated with DebuggerDisplayAttribute. I want to be able to add trace statements to Unit Tests that will display instances of these classes. Does there exist a method in the .NET Framework that will display an object formatted using DebuggerDisplayAttribute (or fall back to using .ToString() if no DebuggerDisplayAttribute is defined)?

    Read the article

  • Creating instance of interface in C#

    - by Max
    I'm working with MS Excel interop in C# and I don't understand how this particular line of code works: var excel = new Microsoft.Office.Interop.Excel.Application(); where Microsoft.Office.Interop.Excel.Application is an INTERFACE defined as: [Guid("000208D5-0000-0000-C000-000000000046")] [CoClass(typeof(ApplicationClass))] public interface Application : _Application, AppEvents_Event { } I'm thinking that some magic happens when the interface is decorated with a CoClass attribute, but still how is it possible that we can create an instance of an interface with a new keyword? Shouldn't it generate a compile time error?

    Read the article

  • Understanding Request Validation in ASP.NET MVC 3

    - by imran_ku07
         Introduction:             A fact that you must always remember "never ever trust user inputs". An application that trusts user inputs may be easily vulnerable to XSS, XSRF, SQL Injection, etc attacks. XSS and XSRF are very dangerous attacks. So to mitigate these attacks ASP.NET introduced request validation in ASP.NET 1.1. During request validation, ASP.NET will throw HttpRequestValidationException: 'A potentially dangerous XXX value was detected from the client', if he found, < followed by an exclamation(like <!) or < followed by the letters a through z(like <s) or & followed by a pound sign(like &#123) as a part of query string, posted form and cookie collection. In ASP.NET 4.0, request validation becomes extensible. This means that you can extend request validation. Also in ASP.NET 4.0, by default request validation is enabled before the BeginRequest phase of an HTTP request. ASP.NET MVC 3 moves one step further by making request validation granular. This allows you to disable request validation for some properties of a model while maintaining request validation for all other cases. In this article I will show you the use of request validation in ASP.NET MVC 3. Then I will briefly explain the internal working of granular request validation.       Description:             First of all create a new ASP.NET MVC 3 application. Then create a simple model class called MyModel,     public class MyModel { public string Prop1 { get; set; } public string Prop2 { get; set; } }             Then just update the index action method as follows,   public ActionResult Index(MyModel p) { return View(); }             Now just run this application. You will find that everything works just fine. Now just append this query string ?Prop1=<s to the url of this application, you will get the HttpRequestValidationException exception.           Now just decorate the Index action method with [ValidateInputAttribute(false)],   [ValidateInput(false)] public ActionResult Index(MyModel p) { return View(); }             Run this application again with same query string. You will find that your application run without any unhandled exception.           Up to now, there is nothing new in ASP.NET MVC 3 because ValidateInputAttribute was present in the previous versions of ASP.NET MVC. Any problem with this approach? Yes there is a problem with this approach. The problem is that now users can send html for both Prop1 and Prop2 properties and a lot of developers are not aware of it. This means that now everyone can send html with both parameters(e.g, ?Prop1=<s&Prop2=<s). So ValidateInput attribute does not gives you the guarantee that your application is safe to XSS or XSRF. This is the reason why ASP.NET MVC team introduced granular request validation in ASP.NET MVC 3. Let's see this feature.           Remove [ValidateInputAttribute(false)] on Index action and update MyModel class as follows,   public class MyModel { [AllowHtml] public string Prop1 { get; set; } public string Prop2 { get; set; } }             Note that AllowHtml attribute is only decorated on Prop1 property. Run this application again with ?Prop1=<s query string. You will find that your application run just fine. Run this application again with ?Prop1=<s&Prop2=<s query string, you will get HttpRequestValidationException exception. This shows that the granular request validation in ASP.NET MVC 3 only allows users to send html for properties decorated with AllowHtml attribute.            Sometimes you may need to access Request.QueryString or Request.Form directly. You may change your code as follows,   [ValidateInput(false)] public ActionResult Index() { var prop1 = Request.QueryString["Prop1"]; return View(); }             Run this application again, you will get the HttpRequestValidationException exception again even you have [ValidateInput(false)] on your Index action. The reason is that Request flags are still not set to unvalidate. I will explain this later. For making this work you need to use Unvalidated extension method,     public ActionResult Index() { var q = Request.Unvalidated().QueryString; var prop1 = q["Prop1"]; return View(); }             Unvalidated extension method is defined in System.Web.Helpers namespace . So you need to add using System.Web.Helpers; in this class file. Run this application again, your application run just fine.             There you have it. If you are not curious to know the internal working of granular request validation then you can skip next paragraphs completely. If you are interested then carry on reading.             Create a new ASP.NET MVC 2 application, then open global.asax.cs file and the following lines,     protected void Application_BeginRequest() { var q = Request.QueryString; }             Then make the Index action method as,    [ValidateInput(false)] public ActionResult Index(string id) { return View(); }             Please note that the Index action method contains a parameter and this action method is decorated with [ValidateInput(false)]. Run this application again, but now with ?id=<s query string, you will get HttpRequestValidationException exception at Application_BeginRequest method. Now just add the following entry in web.config,   <httpRuntime requestValidationMode="2.0"/>             Now run this application again. This time your application will run just fine. Now just see the following quote from ASP.NET 4 Breaking Changes,   In ASP.NET 4, by default, request validation is enabled for all requests, because it is enabled before the BeginRequest phase of an HTTP request. As a result, request validation applies to requests for all ASP.NET resources, not just .aspx page requests. This includes requests such as Web service calls and custom HTTP handlers. Request validation is also active when custom HTTP modules are reading the contents of an HTTP request.             This clearly state that request validation is enabled before the BeginRequest phase of an HTTP request. For understanding what does enabled means here, we need to see HttpRequest.ValidateInput, HttpRequest.QueryString and HttpRequest.Form methods/properties in System.Web assembly. Here is the implementation of HttpRequest.ValidateInput, HttpRequest.QueryString and HttpRequest.Form methods/properties in System.Web assembly,     public NameValueCollection Form { get { if (this._form == null) { this._form = new HttpValueCollection(); if (this._wr != null) { this.FillInFormCollection(); } this._form.MakeReadOnly(); } if (this._flags[2]) { this._flags.Clear(2); this.ValidateNameValueCollection(this._form, RequestValidationSource.Form); } return this._form; } } public NameValueCollection QueryString { get { if (this._queryString == null) { this._queryString = new HttpValueCollection(); if (this._wr != null) { this.FillInQueryStringCollection(); } this._queryString.MakeReadOnly(); } if (this._flags[1]) { this._flags.Clear(1); this.ValidateNameValueCollection(this._queryString, RequestValidationSource.QueryString); } return this._queryString; } } public void ValidateInput() { if (!this._flags[0x8000]) { this._flags.Set(0x8000); this._flags.Set(1); this._flags.Set(2); this._flags.Set(4); this._flags.Set(0x40); this._flags.Set(0x80); this._flags.Set(0x100); this._flags.Set(0x200); this._flags.Set(8); } }             The above code indicates that HttpRequest.QueryString and HttpRequest.Form will only validate the querystring and form collection if certain flags are set. These flags are automatically set if you call HttpRequest.ValidateInput method. Now run the above application again(don't forget to append ?id=<s query string in the url) with the same settings(i.e, requestValidationMode="2.0" setting in web.config and Application_BeginRequest method in global.asax.cs), your application will run just fine. Now just update the Application_BeginRequest method as,   protected void Application_BeginRequest() { Request.ValidateInput(); var q = Request.QueryString; }             Note that I am calling Request.ValidateInput method prior to use Request.QueryString property. ValidateInput method will internally set certain flags(discussed above). These flags will then tells the Request.QueryString (and Request.Form) property that validate the query string(or form) when user call Request.QueryString(or Request.Form) property. So running this application again with ?id=<s query string will throw HttpRequestValidationException exception. Now I hope it is clear to you that what does requestValidationMode do. It just tells the ASP.NET that not invoke the Request.ValidateInput method internally before the BeginRequest phase of an HTTP request if requestValidationMode is set to a value less than 4.0 in web.config. Here is the implementation of HttpRequest.ValidateInputIfRequiredByConfig method which will prove this statement(Don't be confused with HttpRequest and Request. Request is the property of HttpRequest class),    internal void ValidateInputIfRequiredByConfig() { ............................................................... ............................................................... ............................................................... ............................................................... if (httpRuntime.RequestValidationMode >= VersionUtil.Framework40) { this.ValidateInput(); } }              Hopefully the above discussion will clear you how requestValidationMode works in ASP.NET 4. It is also interesting to note that both HttpRequest.QueryString and HttpRequest.Form only throws the exception when you access them first time. Any subsequent access to HttpRequest.QueryString and HttpRequest.Form will not throw any exception. Continuing with the above example, just update Application_BeginRequest method in global.asax.cs file as,   protected void Application_BeginRequest() { try { var q = Request.QueryString; var f = Request.Form; } catch//swallow this exception { } var q1 = Request.QueryString; var f1 = Request.Form; }             Without setting requestValidationMode to 2.0 and without decorating ValidateInput attribute on Index action, your application will work just fine because both HttpRequest.QueryString and HttpRequest.Form will clear their flags after reading HttpRequest.QueryString and HttpRequest.Form for the first time(see the implementation of HttpRequest.QueryString and HttpRequest.Form above).           Now let's see ASP.NET MVC 3 granular request validation internal working. First of all we need to see type of HttpRequest.QueryString and HttpRequest.Form properties. Both HttpRequest.QueryString and HttpRequest.Form properties are of type NameValueCollection which is inherited from the NameObjectCollectionBase class. NameObjectCollectionBase class contains _entriesArray, _entriesTable, NameObjectEntry.Key and NameObjectEntry.Value fields which granular request validation uses internally. In addition granular request validation also uses _queryString, _form and _flags fields, ValidateString method and the Indexer of HttpRequest class. Let's see when and how granular request validation uses these fields.           Create a new ASP.NET MVC 3 application. Then put a breakpoint at Application_BeginRequest method and another breakpoint at HomeController.Index method. Now just run this application. When the break point inside Application_BeginRequest method hits then add the following expression in quick watch window, System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Request.QueryString. You will see the following screen,                                              Now Press F5 so that the second breakpoint inside HomeController.Index method hits. When the second breakpoint hits then add the following expression in quick watch window again, System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Request.QueryString. You will see the following screen,                            First screen shows that _entriesTable field is of type System.Collections.Hashtable and _entriesArray field is of type System.Collections.ArrayList during the BeginRequest phase of the HTTP request. While the second screen shows that _entriesTable type is changed to Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure.DynamicValidationHelper.LazilyValidatingHashtable and _entriesArray type is changed to Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure.DynamicValidationHelper.LazilyValidatingArrayList during executing the Index action method. In addition to these members, ASP.NET MVC 3 also perform some operation on _flags, _form, _queryString and other members of HttpRuntime class internally. This shows that ASP.NET MVC 3 performing some operation on the members of HttpRequest class for making granular request validation possible.           Both LazilyValidatingArrayList and LazilyValidatingHashtable classes are defined in the Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure assembly. You may wonder why their name starts with Lazily. The fact is that now with ASP.NET MVC 3, request validation will be performed lazily. In simple words, Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure assembly is now taking the responsibility for request validation from System.Web assembly. See the below screens. The first screen depicting HttpRequestValidationException exception in ASP.NET MVC 2 application while the second screen showing HttpRequestValidationException exception in ASP.NET MVC 3 application.   In MVC 2:                 In MVC 3:                          The stack trace of the second screenshot shows that Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure assembly (instead of System.Web assembly) is now performing request validation in ASP.NET MVC 3. Now you may ask: where Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure assembly is performing some operation on the members of HttpRequest class. There are at least two places where the Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure assembly performing some operation , Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure.DynamicValidationHelper.GranularValidationReflectionUtil.GetInstance method and Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure.DynamicValidationHelper.ValidationUtility.CollectionReplacer.ReplaceCollection method, Here is the implementation of these methods,   private static GranularValidationReflectionUtil GetInstance() { try { if (DynamicValidationShimReflectionUtil.Instance != null) { return null; } GranularValidationReflectionUtil util = new GranularValidationReflectionUtil(); Type containingType = typeof(NameObjectCollectionBase); string fieldName = "_entriesArray"; bool isStatic = false; Type fieldType = typeof(ArrayList); FieldInfo fieldInfo = CommonReflectionUtil.FindField(containingType, fieldName, isStatic, fieldType); util._del_get_NameObjectCollectionBase_entriesArray = MakeFieldGetterFunc<NameObjectCollectionBase, ArrayList>(fieldInfo); util._del_set_NameObjectCollectionBase_entriesArray = MakeFieldSetterFunc<NameObjectCollectionBase, ArrayList>(fieldInfo); Type type6 = typeof(NameObjectCollectionBase); string str2 = "_entriesTable"; bool flag2 = false; Type type7 = typeof(Hashtable); FieldInfo info2 = CommonReflectionUtil.FindField(type6, str2, flag2, type7); util._del_get_NameObjectCollectionBase_entriesTable = MakeFieldGetterFunc<NameObjectCollectionBase, Hashtable>(info2); util._del_set_NameObjectCollectionBase_entriesTable = MakeFieldSetterFunc<NameObjectCollectionBase, Hashtable>(info2); Type targetType = CommonAssemblies.System.GetType("System.Collections.Specialized.NameObjectCollectionBase+NameObjectEntry"); Type type8 = targetType; string str3 = "Key"; bool flag3 = false; Type type9 = typeof(string); FieldInfo info3 = CommonReflectionUtil.FindField(type8, str3, flag3, type9); util._del_get_NameObjectEntry_Key = MakeFieldGetterFunc<string>(targetType, info3); Type type10 = targetType; string str4 = "Value"; bool flag4 = false; Type type11 = typeof(object); FieldInfo info4 = CommonReflectionUtil.FindField(type10, str4, flag4, type11); util._del_get_NameObjectEntry_Value = MakeFieldGetterFunc<object>(targetType, info4); util._del_set_NameObjectEntry_Value = MakeFieldSetterFunc(targetType, info4); Type type12 = typeof(HttpRequest); string methodName = "ValidateString"; bool flag5 = false; Type[] argumentTypes = new Type[] { typeof(string), typeof(string), typeof(RequestValidationSource) }; Type returnType = typeof(void); MethodInfo methodInfo = CommonReflectionUtil.FindMethod(type12, methodName, flag5, argumentTypes, returnType); util._del_validateStringCallback = CommonReflectionUtil.MakeFastCreateDelegate<HttpRequest, ValidateStringCallback>(methodInfo); Type type = CommonAssemblies.SystemWeb.GetType("System.Web.HttpValueCollection"); util._del_HttpValueCollection_ctor = CommonReflectionUtil.MakeFastNewObject<Func<NameValueCollection>>(type); Type type14 = typeof(HttpRequest); string str6 = "_form"; bool flag6 = false; Type type15 = type; FieldInfo info6 = CommonReflectionUtil.FindField(type14, str6, flag6, type15); util._del_get_HttpRequest_form = MakeFieldGetterFunc<HttpRequest, NameValueCollection>(info6); util._del_set_HttpRequest_form = MakeFieldSetterFunc(typeof(HttpRequest), info6); Type type16 = typeof(HttpRequest); string str7 = "_queryString"; bool flag7 = false; Type type17 = type; FieldInfo info7 = CommonReflectionUtil.FindField(type16, str7, flag7, type17); util._del_get_HttpRequest_queryString = MakeFieldGetterFunc<HttpRequest, NameValueCollection>(info7); util._del_set_HttpRequest_queryString = MakeFieldSetterFunc(typeof(HttpRequest), info7); Type type3 = CommonAssemblies.SystemWeb.GetType("System.Web.Util.SimpleBitVector32"); Type type18 = typeof(HttpRequest); string str8 = "_flags"; bool flag8 = false; Type type19 = type3; FieldInfo flagsFieldInfo = CommonReflectionUtil.FindField(type18, str8, flag8, type19); Type type20 = type3; string str9 = "get_Item"; bool flag9 = false; Type[] typeArray4 = new Type[] { typeof(int) }; Type type21 = typeof(bool); MethodInfo itemGetter = CommonReflectionUtil.FindMethod(type20, str9, flag9, typeArray4, type21); Type type22 = type3; string str10 = "set_Item"; bool flag10 = false; Type[] typeArray6 = new Type[] { typeof(int), typeof(bool) }; Type type23 = typeof(void); MethodInfo itemSetter = CommonReflectionUtil.FindMethod(type22, str10, flag10, typeArray6, type23); MakeRequestValidationFlagsAccessors(flagsFieldInfo, itemGetter, itemSetter, out util._del_BitVector32_get_Item, out util._del_BitVector32_set_Item); return util; } catch { return null; } } private static void ReplaceCollection(HttpContext context, FieldAccessor<NameValueCollection> fieldAccessor, Func<NameValueCollection> propertyAccessor, Action<NameValueCollection> storeInUnvalidatedCollection, RequestValidationSource validationSource, ValidationSourceFlag validationSourceFlag) { NameValueCollection originalBackingCollection; ValidateStringCallback validateString; SimpleValidateStringCallback simpleValidateString; Func<NameValueCollection> getActualCollection; Action<NameValueCollection> makeCollectionLazy; HttpRequest request = context.Request; Func<bool> getValidationFlag = delegate { return _reflectionUtil.GetRequestValidationFlag(request, validationSourceFlag); }; Func<bool> func = delegate { return !getValidationFlag(); }; Action<bool> setValidationFlag = delegate (bool value) { _reflectionUtil.SetRequestValidationFlag(request, validationSourceFlag, value); }; if ((fieldAccessor.Value != null) && func()) { storeInUnvalidatedCollection(fieldAccessor.Value); } else { originalBackingCollection = fieldAccessor.Value; validateString = _reflectionUtil.MakeValidateStringCallback(context.Request); simpleValidateString = delegate (string value, string key) { if (((key == null) || !key.StartsWith("__", StringComparison.Ordinal)) && !string.IsNullOrEmpty(value)) { validateString(value, key, validationSource); } }; getActualCollection = delegate { fieldAccessor.Value = originalBackingCollection; bool flag = getValidationFlag(); setValidationFlag(false); NameValueCollection col = propertyAccessor(); setValidationFlag(flag); storeInUnvalidatedCollection(new NameValueCollection(col)); return col; }; makeCollectionLazy = delegate (NameValueCollection col) { simpleValidateString(col[null], null); LazilyValidatingArrayList array = new LazilyValidatingArrayList(_reflectionUtil.GetNameObjectCollectionEntriesArray(col), simpleValidateString); _reflectionUtil.SetNameObjectCollectionEntriesArray(col, array); LazilyValidatingHashtable table = new LazilyValidatingHashtable(_reflectionUtil.GetNameObjectCollectionEntriesTable(col), simpleValidateString); _reflectionUtil.SetNameObjectCollectionEntriesTable(col, table); }; Func<bool> hasValidationFired = func; Action disableValidation = delegate { setValidationFlag(false); }; Func<int> fillInActualFormContents = delegate { NameValueCollection values = getActualCollection(); makeCollectionLazy(values); return values.Count; }; DeferredCountArrayList list = new DeferredCountArrayList(hasValidationFired, disableValidation, fillInActualFormContents); NameValueCollection target = _reflectionUtil.NewHttpValueCollection(); _reflectionUtil.SetNameObjectCollectionEntriesArray(target, list); fieldAccessor.Value = target; } }             Hopefully the above code will help you to understand the internal working of granular request validation. It is also important to note that Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure assembly invokes HttpRequest.ValidateInput method internally. For further understanding please see Microsoft.Web.Infrastructure assembly code. Finally you may ask: at which stage ASP NET MVC 3 will invoke these methods. You will find this answer by looking at the following method source,   Unvalidated extension method for HttpRequest class defined in System.Web.Helpers.Validation class. System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.ProcessRequestInit method. System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.ValidateRequest method. System.Web.WebPages.WebPageHttpHandler.ProcessRequestInternal method.       Summary:             ASP.NET helps in preventing XSS attack using a feature called request validation. In this article, I showed you how you can use granular request validation in ASP.NET MVC 3. I explain you the internal working of  granular request validation. Hope you will enjoy this article too.   SyntaxHighlighter.all()

    Read the article

  • MVC Automatic Menu

    - by Nuri Halperin
    An ex-colleague of mine used to call his SQL script generator "Super-Scriptmatic 2000". It impressed our then boss little, but was fun to say and use. We called every batch job and script "something 2000" from that day on. I'm tempted to call this one Menu-Matic 2000, except it's waaaay past 2000. Oh well. The problem: I'm developing a bunch of stuff in MVC. There's no PM to generate mounds of requirements and there's no Ux Architect to create wireframe. During development, things change. Specifically, actions get renamed, moved from controller x to y etc. Well, as the site grows, it becomes a major pain to keep a static menu up to date, because the links change. The HtmlHelper doesn't live up to it's name and provides little help. How do I keep this growing list of pesky little forgotten actions reigned in? The general plan is: Decorate every action you want as a menu item with a custom attribute Reflect out all menu items into a structure at load time Render the menu using as CSS  friendly <ul><li> HTML. The MvcMenuItemAttribute decorates an action, designating it to be included as a menu item: [AttributeUsage(AttributeTargets.Method, AllowMultiple = true)] public class MvcMenuItemAttribute : Attribute {   public string MenuText { get; set; }   public int Order { get; set; }   public string ParentLink { get; set; }   internal string Controller { get; set; }   internal string Action { get; set; }     #region ctor   public MvcMenuItemAttribute(string menuText) : this(menuText, 0) { } public MvcMenuItemAttribute(string menuText, int order) { MenuText = menuText; Order = order; }       internal string Link { get { return string.Format("/{0}/{1}", Controller, this.Action); } }   internal MvcMenuItemAttribute ParentItem { get; set; } #endregion } The MenuText allows overriding the text displayed on the menu. The Order allows the items to be ordered. The ParentLink allows you to make this item a child of another menu item. An example action could then be decorated thusly: [MvcMenuItem("Tracks", Order = 20, ParentLink = "/Session/Index")] . All pretty straightforward methinks. The challenge with menu hierarchy becomes fairly apparent when you try to render a menu and highlight the "current" item or render a breadcrumb control. Both encounter an  ambiguity if you allow a data source to have more than one menu item with the same URL link. The issue is that there is no great way to tell which link a person click. Using referring URL will fail if a user bookmarked the page. Using some extra query string to disambiguate duplicate URLs essentially changes the links, and also ads a chance of collision with other query parameters. Besides, that smells. The stock ASP.Net sitemap provider simply disallows duplicate URLS. I decided not to, and simply pick the first one encountered as the "current". Although it doesn't solve the issue completely – one might say they wanted the second of the 2 links to be "current"- it allows one to include a link twice (home->deals and products->deals etc), and the logic of deciding "current" is easy enough to explain to the customer. Now that we got that out of the way, let's build the menu data structure: public static List<MvcMenuItemAttribute> ListMenuItems(Assembly assembly) { var result = new List<MvcMenuItemAttribute>(); foreach (var type in assembly.GetTypes()) { if (!type.IsSubclassOf(typeof(Controller))) { continue; } foreach (var method in type.GetMethods()) { var items = method.GetCustomAttributes(typeof(MvcMenuItemAttribute), false) as MvcMenuItemAttribute[]; if (items == null) { continue; } foreach (var item in items) { if (String.IsNullOrEmpty(item.Controller)) { item.Controller = type.Name.Substring(0, type.Name.Length - "Controller".Length); } if (String.IsNullOrEmpty(item.Action)) { item.Action = method.Name; } result.Add(item); } } } return result.OrderBy(i => i.Order).ToList(); } Using reflection, the ListMenuItems method takes an assembly (you will hand it your MVC web assembly) and generates a list of menu items. It digs up all the types, and for each one that is an MVC Controller, digs up the methods. Methods decorated with the MvcMenuItemAttribute get plucked and added to the output list. Again, pretty simple. To make the structure hierarchical, a LINQ expression matches up all the items to their parent: public static void RegisterMenuItems(List<MvcMenuItemAttribute> items) { _MenuItems = items; _MenuItems.ForEach(i => i.ParentItem = items.FirstOrDefault(p => String.Equals(p.Link, i.ParentLink, StringComparison.InvariantCultureIgnoreCase))); } The _MenuItems is simply an internal list to keep things around for later rendering. Finally, to package the menu building for easy consumption: public static void RegisterMenuItems(Type mvcApplicationType) { RegisterMenuItems(ListMenuItems(Assembly.GetAssembly(mvcApplicationType))); } To bring this puppy home, a call in Global.asax.cs Application_Start() registers the menu. Notice the ugliness of reflection is tucked away from the innocent developer. All they have to do is call the RegisterMenuItems() and pass in the type of the application. When you use the new project template, global.asax declares a class public class MvcApplication : HttpApplication and that is why the Register call passes in that type. protected void Application_Start() { AreaRegistration.RegisterAllAreas(); RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes);   MvcMenu.RegisterMenuItems(typeof(MvcApplication)); }   What else is left to do? Oh, right, render! public static void ShowMenu(this TextWriter output) { var writer = new HtmlTextWriter(output);   renderHierarchy(writer, _MenuItems, null); }   public static void ShowBreadCrumb(this TextWriter output, Uri currentUri) { var writer = new HtmlTextWriter(output); string currentLink = "/" + currentUri.GetComponents(UriComponents.Path, UriFormat.Unescaped);   var menuItem = _MenuItems.FirstOrDefault(m => m.Link.Equals(currentLink, StringComparison.CurrentCultureIgnoreCase)); if (menuItem != null) { renderBreadCrumb(writer, _MenuItems, menuItem); } }   private static void renderBreadCrumb(HtmlTextWriter writer, List<MvcMenuItemAttribute> menuItems, MvcMenuItemAttribute current) { if (current == null) { return; } var parent = current.ParentItem; renderBreadCrumb(writer, menuItems, parent); writer.Write(current.MenuText); writer.Write(" / ");   }     static void renderHierarchy(HtmlTextWriter writer, List<MvcMenuItemAttribute> hierarchy, MvcMenuItemAttribute root) { if (!hierarchy.Any(i => i.ParentItem == root)) return;   writer.RenderBeginTag(HtmlTextWriterTag.Ul); foreach (var current in hierarchy.Where(element => element.ParentItem == root).OrderBy(i => i.Order)) { if (ItemFilter == null || ItemFilter(current)) {   writer.RenderBeginTag(HtmlTextWriterTag.Li); writer.AddAttribute(HtmlTextWriterAttribute.Href, current.Link); writer.AddAttribute(HtmlTextWriterAttribute.Alt, current.MenuText); writer.RenderBeginTag(HtmlTextWriterTag.A); writer.WriteEncodedText(current.MenuText); writer.RenderEndTag(); // link renderHierarchy(writer, hierarchy, current); writer.RenderEndTag(); // li } } writer.RenderEndTag(); // ul } The ShowMenu method renders the menu out to the provided TextWriter. In previous posts I've discussed my partiality to using well debugged, time test HtmlTextWriter to render HTML rather than writing out angled brackets by hand. In addition, writing out using the actual writer on the actual stream rather than generating string and byte intermediaries (yes, StringBuilder being no exception) disturbs me. To carry out the rendering of an hierarchical menu, the recursive renderHierarchy() is used. You may notice that an ItemFilter is called before rendering each item. I figured that at some point one might want to exclude certain items from the menu based on security role or context or something. That delegate is the hook for such future feature. To carry out rendering of a breadcrumb recursion is used again, this time simply to unwind the parent hierarchy from the leaf node, then rendering on the return from the recursion rather than as we go along deeper. I guess I was stuck in LISP that day.. recursion is fun though.   Now all that is left is some usage! Open your Site.Master or wherever you'd like to place a menu or breadcrumb, and plant one of these calls: <% MvcMenu.ShowBreadCrumb(this.Writer, Request.Url); %> to show a breadcrumb trail (notice lack of "=" after <% and the semicolon). <% MvcMenu.ShowMenu(Writer); %> to show the menu.   As mentioned before, the HTML output is nested <UL> <LI> tags, which should make it easy to style using abundant CSS to produce anything from static horizontal or vertical to dynamic drop-downs.   This has been quite a fun little implementation and I was pleased that the code size remained low. The main crux was figuring out how to pass parent information from the attribute to the hierarchy builder because attributes have restricted parameter types. Once I settled on that implementation, the rest falls into place quite easily.

    Read the article

  • LLBLGen Pro and JSON serialization

    - by FransBouma
    I accidentally removed a reply from my previous blogpost, and as this blog-engine here at weblogs.asp.net is apparently falling apart, I can't re-add it as it thought it would be wise to disable comment controls on all posts, except new ones. So I'll post the reply here as a quote and reply on it. 'Steven' asks: What would the future be for LLBLGen Pro to support JSON for serialization? Would it be worth the effort for a LLBLGenPro user to bother creating some code templates to produce additional JSON serializable classes? Or just create some basic POCO classes which could be used for exchange of client/server data and use DTO to map these back to LLBGenPro ones? If I understand the work around, it is at the expense of losing xml serialization. Well, as described in the previous post, to enable JSON serialization, you can do that with a couple of lines and some attribute assignments. However, indeed, the attributes might make the XML serialization not working, as described in the previous blogpost. This is the case if the service you're using serializes objects using the DataContract serializer: this serializer will give up to serialize the entity objects to XML as the entity objects implement IXmlSerializable and this is a no-go area for the DataContract serializer. However, if your service doesn't use a DataContract serializer, or you serialize the objects manually to Xml using an xml serializer, you're fine. When you want to switch to Xml serializing again, instead of JSON in WebApi, and you have decorated the entity classes with the data-contract attributes, you can switch off the DataContract serializer, by setting a global configuration setting: var xml = GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.Formatters.XmlFormatter; xml.UseXmlSerializer = true; This will make the WebApi use the XmlSerializer, and run the normal IXmlSerializable interface implementation.

    Read the article

  • Enum.HasFlag

    - by Scott Dorman
    An enumerated type, also called an enumeration (or just an enum for short), is simply a way to create a numeric type restricted to a predetermined set of valid values with meaningful names for those values. While most enumerations represent discrete values, or well-known combinations of those values, sometimes you want to combine values in an arbitrary fashion. These enumerations are known as flags enumerations because the values represent flags which can be set or unset. To combine multiple enumeration values, you use the logical OR operator. For example, consider the following: public enum FileAccess { None = 0, Read = 1, Write = 2, }   class Program { static void Main(string[] args) { FileAccess access = FileAccess.Read | FileAccess.Write; Console.WriteLine(access); } } The output of this simple console application is: The value 3 is the numeric value associated with the combination of FileAccess.Read and FileAccess.Write. Clearly, this isn’t the best representation. What you really want is for the output to look like: To achieve this result, you simply add the Flags attribute to the enumeration. The Flags attribute changes how the string representation of the enumeration value is displayed when using the ToString() method. Although the .NET Framework does not require it, enumerations that will be used to represent flags should be decorated with the Flags attribute since it provides a clear indication of intent. One “problem” with Flags enumerations is determining when a particular flag is set. The code to do this isn’t particularly difficult, but unless you use it regularly it can be easy to forget. To test if the access variable has the FileAccess.Read flag set, you would use the following code: (access & FileAccess.Read) == FileAccess.Read Starting with .NET 4, a HasFlag static method has been added to the Enum class which allows you to easily perform these tests: access.HasFlag(FileAccess.Read) This method follows one of the “themes” for the .NET Framework 4, which is to simplify and reduce the amount of boilerplate code like this you must write. Technorati Tags: .NET,C# 4

    Read the article

  • Interfaces, Adapters, exposing business objects via WCF design

    - by Onam
    I know there have been countless discussions about this but I think this question is slightly different and may perhaps prompt a heated discussion (lets keep it friendly). The scene: I am developing a system as a means for me to learn various concepts and I came across a predicament which my brain is conflicting with. That is whether to keep my interfaces in a separate class library or should they live side by side my business objects. I want to expose certain objects via WCF, however refuse to expose them in its entirety. I am sure most will agree exposing properties such as IDs and other properties is not good practice but also I don't want to have my business objects decorated with attributes. The question: Essentially, I'll be having a separate interface for each of my objects that will essentially be exposed to the outside world (could end up being quite a few) so does it make sense to create a separate class library for interfaces? This also brings up the question of whether adapters should live in a separate class library too as ideally I want a mechanism from transferring from one object to the other and vice versa?

    Read the article

  • Why does DataContractJsonSerializer not include generic like JavaScriptSerializer?

    - by Patrick Magee
    So the JavaScriptSerializer was deprecated in favor of the DataContractJsonSerializer. var client = new WebClient(); var json = await client.DownloadStringTaskAsync(url); // http://example.com/api/people/1 // Deprecated, but clean looking and generally fits in nicely with // other code in my app domain that makes use of generics var serializer = new JavaScriptSerializer(); Person p = serializer.Deserialize<Person>(json); // Now have to make use of ugly typeof to get the Type when I // already know the Type at compile type. Why no Generic type T? var serializer = new DataContractJsonSerializer(typeof(Person)); Person p = serializer.ReadObject(json) as Person; The JavaScriptSerializer is nice and allows you to deserialize using a type of T generic in the function name. Understandably, it's been deprecated for good reason, with the DataContractJsonSerializer, you can decorate your Type to be deserialized with various things so it isn't so brittle like the JavaScriptSerializer, for example [DataMember(name = "personName")] public string Name { get; set; } Is there a particular reason why they decided to only allow users to pass in the Type? Type type = typeof(Person); var serializer = new DataContractJsonSerializer(type); Person p = serializer.ReadObject(json) as Person; Why not this? var serializer = new DataContractJsonSerializer(); Person p = serializer.ReadObject<Person>(json); They can still use reflection with the DataContract decorated attributes based on the T that I've specified on the .ReadObject<T>(json)

    Read the article

  • Solved: Operation is not valid due to the current state of the object

    - by ChrisD
    We use public static methods decorated with [WebMethod] to support our Ajax Postbacks.   Recently, I received an error from a UI developing stating he was receiving the following error when attempting his post back: {   "Message": "Operation is not valid due to the current state of the object.",   "StackTrace": "   at System.Web.Script.Serialization.ObjectConverter.ConvertDictionaryToObject(IDictionary`2 dictionary, Type type, JavaScriptSerializer serializer, Boolean throwOnError, Object& convertedObject)\r\n   at System.Web.Script.Serialization.ObjectConverter.ConvertObjectToTypeInternal(Object o, Type type, JavaScriptSerializer serializer, Boolean throwOnError, Object& convertedObject)\r\n   at System.Web.Script.Serialization.ObjectConverter.ConvertObjectToTypeMain(Object o, Type type, JavaScriptSerializer serializer, Boolean throwOnError, Object& convertedObject)\r\n   at System.Web.Script.Serialization.JavaScriptObjectDeserializer.DeserializeInternal(Int32 depth)\r\n   at System.Web.Script.Serialization.JavaScriptObjectDeserializer.DeserializeDictionary(Int32 depth)\r\n   at System.Web.Script.Serialization.JavaScriptObjectDeserializer.DeserializeInternal(Int32 depth)\r\n   at System.Web.Script.Serialization.JavaScriptObjectDeserializer.DeserializeDictionary(Int32 depth)\r\n   at System.Web.Script.Serialization.JavaScriptObjectDeserializer.DeserializeInternal(Int32 depth)\r\n   at System.Web.Script.Serialization.JavaScriptObjectDeserializer.BasicDeserialize(String input, Int32 depthLimit, JavaScriptSerializer serializer)\r\n   at System.Web.Script.Serialization.JavaScriptSerializer.Deserialize(JavaScriptSerializer serializer, String input, Type type, Int32 depthLimit)\r\n   at System.Web.Script.Serialization.JavaScriptSerializer.Deserialize[T](String input)\r\n   at System.Web.Script.Services.RestHandler.GetRawParamsFromPostRequest(HttpContext context, JavaScriptSerializer serializer)\r\n   at System.Web.Script.Services.RestHandler.GetRawParams(WebServiceMethodData methodData, HttpContext context)\r\n   at System.Web.Script.Services.RestHandler.ExecuteWebServiceCall(HttpContext context, WebServiceMethodData methodData)",   "ExceptionType": "System.InvalidOperationException" }   Goggling this error brought me little support.  All the results talked about increasing the aspnet:MaxJsonDeserializerMembers value to handle larger payloads.  Since 1) I’m not using the asp.net ajax model and 2) the payload is very small, this clearly was not the cause of my issue. Here’s the payload the UI developer was sending to the endpoint: {   "FundingSource": {     "__type": "XX.YY.Engine.Contract.Funding.EvidenceBasedFundingSource,  XX.YY.Engine.Contract",     "MeansType": 13,     "FundingMethodName": "LegalTender",   },   "AddToProfile": false,   "ProfileNickName": "",   "FundingAmount": 0 } By tweaking the JSON I’ve found the culprit. Apparently the default JSS Serializer used doesn’t like the assembly name in the __type value.  Removing the assembly portion of the type name resolved my issue. { "FundingSource": { "__type": "XX.YY.Engine.Contract.Funding.EvidenceBasedFundingSource", "MeansType": 13, "FundingMethodName": "LegalTender", }, "AddToProfile": false, "ProfileNickName": "", "FundingAmount": 0 }

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6  | Next Page >