Search Results

Search found 32 results on 2 pages for 'viewengine'.

Page 2/2 | < Previous Page | 1 2 

  • How to use routing in a ASP MVC website to localize in two languages - But keeping exiting URLs

    - by Anders Pedersen
    We have a couple ASP MVC websites just using the standard VS templates default settings - Working as wanted. But now I want to localize these website ( They are now in Dutch and I will add the English language ) I would like to use routing and not Resource because: 1. Languages will differ in content, numbers of pages, etc. 2. The content is mostly text. I would like the URLs to look some thing like this - www.domain.com/en/Home/Index, www.domain.nl/nl/Home/Index. But the last one should also work with - www.domain.nl/Home/Index - Witch is the exciting URLs. I have implemented Phil Haacks areas ViewEngine from this blogpost - http://haacked.com/archive/2008/11/04/areas-in-aspnetmvc.aspx. But only putting the English website in the areas and keeping the Dutch in old structure. Witch are served as Phils default fallback. But the problem is here that I have to duplicate my controllers for both language's. So I tried the work method described in this tread - http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1712167/asp-net-mvc-localization-route. It works OK with the ?en? and /nl/ but not with the old URLs. When using this code in the global.asax the URL without the culture isn't working. public static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes) { //routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}"); routes.MapRoute( "Default", // Route name "{culture}/{controller}/{action}/{id}", // URL with parameters new { culture = "nl-NL", controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = "" } // Parameter defaults ); routes.MapRoute( "DefaultWitoutCulture", // Route name "{controller}/{action}/{id}", // URL with parameters new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = "" } // Parameter defaults ); } I properly overlooking some thing simple but I can't get this to work for me. Or are there a better way of doing this?

    Read the article

  • Test Views in ASP.NET MVC2 (ala RSpec)

    - by Dmitriy Nagirnyak
    Hi, I am really missing heavily the ability to test Views independently of controllers. The way RSpec does it. What I want to do is to perform assertions on the rendered view (where no controller is involved!). In order to do so I should provide required Model, ViewData and maybe some details from HttpContextBase (when will we get rid of HttpContext!). So far I have not found anything that allows doing it. Also it might heavily depend on the ViewEngine being used. List of things that views might contain are: Partial views (may be nested deeply). Master pages (or similar in other view engines). Html helpers generating links and other elements. Generally almost anything in a range of common sense :) . Also please note that I am not talking about client-side testing and thus Selenium is just not related to it at all. It is just plain .NET testing. So are there any options to actually do the testing of views? Thanks, Dmitriy.

    Read the article

  • Asp.net MVC VirtualPathProvider views parse error

    - by madcapnmckay
    Hi, I am working on a plugin system for Asp.net MVC 2. I have a dll containing controllers and views as embedded resources. I scan the plugin dlls for controller using StructureMap and I then can pull them out and instantiate them when requested. This works fine. I then have a VirtualPathProvider which I adapted from this post public class AssemblyResourceProvider : VirtualPathProvider { protected virtual string WidgetDirectory { get { return "~/bin"; } } private bool IsAppResourcePath(string virtualPath) { var checkPath = VirtualPathUtility.ToAppRelative(virtualPath); return checkPath.StartsWith(WidgetDirectory, StringComparison.InvariantCultureIgnoreCase); } public override bool FileExists(string virtualPath) { return (IsAppResourcePath(virtualPath) || base.FileExists(virtualPath)); } public override VirtualFile GetFile(string virtualPath) { return IsAppResourcePath(virtualPath) ? new AssemblyResourceVirtualFile(virtualPath) : base.GetFile(virtualPath); } public override CacheDependency GetCacheDependency(string virtualPath, IEnumerable virtualPathDependencies, DateTime utcStart) { return IsAppResourcePath(virtualPath) ? null : base.GetCacheDependency(virtualPath, virtualPathDependencies, utcStart); } } internal class AssemblyResourceVirtualFile : VirtualFile { private readonly string path; public AssemblyResourceVirtualFile(string virtualPath) : base(virtualPath) { path = VirtualPathUtility.ToAppRelative(virtualPath); } public override Stream Open() { var parts = path.Split('/'); var resourceName = Path.GetFileName(path); var apath = HttpContext.Current.Server.MapPath(Path.GetDirectoryName(path)); var assembly = Assembly.LoadFile(apath); return assembly != null ? assembly.GetManifestResourceStream(assembly.GetManifestResourceNames().SingleOrDefault(s => string.Compare(s, resourceName, true) == 0)) : null; } } The VPP seems to be working fine also. The view is found and is pulled out into a stream. I then receive a parse error Could not load type 'System.Web.Mvc.ViewUserControl<dynamic>'. which I can't find mentioned in any previous example of pluggable views. Why would my view not compile at this stage? Thanks for any help, Ian EDIT: Getting closer to an answer but not quite clear why things aren't compiling. Based on the comments I checked the versions and everything is in V2, I believe dynamic was brought in at V2 so this is fine. I don't even have V3 installed so it can't be that. I have however got the view to render, if I remove the <dynamic> altogether. So a VPP works but only if the view is not strongly typed or dynamic This makes sense for the strongly typed scenario as the type is in the dynamically loaded dll so the viewengine will not be aware of it, even though the dll is in the bin. Is there a way to load types at app start? Considering having a go with MEF instead of my bespoke Structuremap solution. What do you think?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC, Webform hybrid

    - by Greg Ogle
    We (me and my team) have a ASP.NET MVC application and we are integrating a page or two that are Web Forms. We are trying to reuse the Master Page from our MVC part of the app in the WebForms part. We have found a way of rendering an MVC partial view in web forms, which works great, until we try and do a postback, which is the reason for using a WebForm. The Error: Validation of viewstate MAC failed. If this application is hosted by a Web Farm or cluster, ensure that configuration specifies the same validationKey and validation algorithm. AutoGenerate cannot be used in a cluster. The Code to render the partial view from a WebForm (credited to "How to include a partial view inside a webform"): public static class WebFormMVCUtil { public static void RenderPartial(string partialName, object model) { //get a wrapper for the legacy WebForm context var httpCtx = new HttpContextWrapper(System.Web.HttpContext.Current); //create a mock route that points to the empty controller var rt = new RouteData(); rt.Values.Add("controller", "WebFormController"); //create a controller context for the route and http context var ctx = new ControllerContext( new RequestContext(httpCtx, rt), new WebFormController()); //find the partial view using the viewengine var view = ViewEngines.Engines.FindPartialView(ctx, partialName).View; //create a view context and assign the model var vctx = new ViewContext(ctx, view, new ViewDataDictionary { Model = model }, new TempDataDictionary()); //ERROR OCCURS ON THIS LINE view.Render(vctx, System.Web.HttpContext.Current.Response.Output); } } My only experience with this error is in context of a web farm, which is not the case. Also, I understand that the machine key is used for decrypting the ViewState. Any information on how to diagnose this issue would be appreciated. A Work-around: So far the work-around is to move the header content to a PartialView, then use an AJAX call to call a page with just the Partial View from the WebForms, and then using the PartialView directly on the MVC Views. Also, we are still able to share non-tech-specific parts of the Master Page, i.e. anything that is not MVC specific. Still yet, this is not an ideal solution, a server-side solution is still desired. Also, this solutino has issues when working with controls that have more sophisticated controls, using JavaScript, particularly dynamically generated script as used by 3rd party controls.

    Read the article

  • MvcExtensions – Bootstrapping

    - by kazimanzurrashid
    When you create a new ASP.NET MVC application you will find that the global.asax contains the following lines: namespace MvcApplication1 { // Note: For instructions on enabling IIS6 or IIS7 classic mode, // visit http://go.microsoft.com/?LinkId=9394801 public class MvcApplication : System.Web.HttpApplication { public static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes) { routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}"); routes.MapRoute( "Default", // Route name "{controller}/{action}/{id}", // URL with parameters new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional } // Parameter defaults ); } protected void Application_Start() { AreaRegistration.RegisterAllAreas(); RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes); } } } As the application grows, there are quite a lot of plumbing code gets into the global.asax which quickly becomes a design smell. Lets take a quick look at the code of one of the open source project that I recently visited: public static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes) { routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}"); routes.MapRoute("Default","{controller}/{action}/{id}", new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = "" }); } protected override void OnApplicationStarted() { Error += OnError; EndRequest += OnEndRequest; var settings = new SparkSettings() .AddNamespace("System") .AddNamespace("System.Collections.Generic") .AddNamespace("System.Web.Mvc") .AddNamespace("System.Web.Mvc.Html") .AddNamespace("MvcContrib.FluentHtml") .AddNamespace("********") .AddNamespace("********.Web") .SetPageBaseType("ApplicationViewPage") .SetAutomaticEncoding(true); #if DEBUG settings.SetDebug(true); #endif var viewFactory = new SparkViewFactory(settings); ViewEngines.Engines.Add(viewFactory); #if !DEBUG PrecompileViews(viewFactory); #endif RegisterAllControllersIn("********.Web"); log4net.Config.XmlConfigurator.Configure(); RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes); Factory.Load(new Components.WebDependencies()); ModelBinders.Binders.DefaultBinder = new Binders.GenericBinderResolver(Factory.TryGet<IModelBinder>); ValidatorConfiguration.Initialize("********"); HtmlValidationExtensions.Initialize(ValidatorConfiguration.Rules); } private void OnEndRequest(object sender, System.EventArgs e) { if (((HttpApplication)sender).Context.Handler is MvcHandler) { CreateKernel().Get<ISessionSource>().Close(); } } private void OnError(object sender, System.EventArgs e) { CreateKernel().Get<ISessionSource>().Close(); } protected override IKernel CreateKernel() { return Factory.Kernel; } private static void PrecompileViews(SparkViewFactory viewFactory) { var batch = new SparkBatchDescriptor(); batch.For<HomeController>().For<ManageController>(); viewFactory.Precompile(batch); } As you can see there are quite a few of things going on in the above code, Registering the ViewEngine, Compiling the Views, Registering the Routes/Controllers/Model Binders, Settings up Logger, Validations and as you can imagine the more it becomes complex the more things will get added in the application start. One of the goal of the MVCExtensions is to reduce the above design smell. Instead of writing all the plumbing code in the application start, it contains BootstrapperTask to register individual services. Out of the box, it contains BootstrapperTask to register Controllers, Controller Factory, Action Invoker, Action Filters, Model Binders, Model Metadata/Validation Providers, ValueProvideraFactory, ViewEngines etc and it is intelligent enough to automatically detect the above types and register into the ASP.NET MVC Framework. Other than the built-in tasks you can create your own custom task which will be automatically executed when the application starts. When the BootstrapperTasks are in action you will find the global.asax pretty much clean like the following: public class MvcApplication : UnityMvcApplication { public void ErrorLog_Filtering(object sender, ExceptionFilterEventArgs e) { Check.Argument.IsNotNull(e, "e"); HttpException exception = e.Exception.GetBaseException() as HttpException; if ((exception != null) && (exception.GetHttpCode() == (int)HttpStatusCode.NotFound)) { e.Dismiss(); } } } The above code is taken from my another open source project Shrinkr, as you can see the global.asax is longer cluttered with any plumbing code. One special thing you have noticed that it is inherited from the UnityMvcApplication rather than regular HttpApplication. There are separate version of this class for each IoC Container like NinjectMvcApplication, StructureMapMvcApplication etc. Other than executing the built-in tasks, the Shrinkr also has few custom tasks which gets executed when the application starts. For example, when the application starts, we want to ensure that the default users (which is specified in the web.config) are created. The following is the custom task that is used to create those default users: public class CreateDefaultUsers : BootstrapperTask { protected override TaskContinuation ExecuteCore(IServiceLocator serviceLocator) { IUserRepository userRepository = serviceLocator.GetInstance<IUserRepository>(); IUnitOfWork unitOfWork = serviceLocator.GetInstance<IUnitOfWork>(); IEnumerable<User> users = serviceLocator.GetInstance<Settings>().DefaultUsers; bool shouldCommit = false; foreach (User user in users) { if (userRepository.GetByName(user.Name) == null) { user.AllowApiAccess(ApiSetting.InfiniteLimit); userRepository.Add(user); shouldCommit = true; } } if (shouldCommit) { unitOfWork.Commit(); } return TaskContinuation.Continue; } } There are several other Tasks in the Shrinkr that we are also using which you will find in that project. To create a custom bootstrapping task you have create a new class which either implements the IBootstrapperTask interface or inherits from the abstract BootstrapperTask class, I would recommend to start with the BootstrapperTask as it already has the required code that you have to write in case if you choose the IBootstrapperTask interface. As you can see in the above code we are overriding the ExecuteCore to create the default users, the MVCExtensions is responsible for populating the  ServiceLocator prior calling this method and in this method we are using the service locator to get the dependencies that are required to create the users (I will cover the custom dependencies registration in the next post). Once the users are created, we are returning a special enum, TaskContinuation as the return value, the TaskContinuation can have three values Continue (default), Skip and Break. The reason behind of having this enum is, in some  special cases you might want to skip the next task in the chain or break the complete chain depending upon the currently running task, in those cases you will use the other two values instead of the Continue. The last thing I want to cover in the bootstrapping task is the Order. By default all the built-in tasks as well as newly created task order is set to the DefaultOrder(a static property), in some special cases you might want to execute it before/after all the other tasks, in those cases you will assign the Order in the Task constructor. For Example, in Shrinkr, we want to run few background services when the all the tasks are executed, so we assigned the order as DefaultOrder + 1. Here is the code of that Task: public class ConfigureBackgroundServices : BootstrapperTask { private IEnumerable<IBackgroundService> backgroundServices; public ConfigureBackgroundServices() { Order = DefaultOrder + 1; } protected override TaskContinuation ExecuteCore(IServiceLocator serviceLocator) { backgroundServices = serviceLocator.GetAllInstances<IBackgroundService>().ToList(); backgroundServices.Each(service => service.Start()); return TaskContinuation.Continue; } protected override void DisposeCore() { backgroundServices.Each(service => service.Stop()); } } That’s it for today, in the next post I will cover the custom service registration, so stay tuned.

    Read the article

  • Multi-tenant ASP.NET MVC - Views

    - by zowens
    Part I – Introduction Part II – Foundation Part III – Controllers   So far we have covered the basic premise of tenants and how they will be delegated. Now comes a big issue with multi-tenancy, the views. In some applications, you will not have to override views for each tenant. However, one of my requirements is to add extra views (and controller actions) along with overriding views from the core structure. This presents a bit of a problem in locating views for each tenant request. I have chosen quite an opinionated approach at the present but will coming back to the “views” issue in a later post. What’s the deal? The path I’ve chosen is to use precompiled Spark views. I really love Spark View Engine and was planning on using it in my project anyways. However, I ran across a really neat aspect of the source when I was having a look under the hood. There’s an easy way to hook in embedded views from your project. There are solutions that provide this, but they implement a special Virtual Path Provider. While I think this is a great solution, I would rather just have Spark take care of the view resolution. The magic actually happens during the compilation of the views into a bin-deployable DLL. After the views are compiled, the are simply pulled out of the views DLL. Each tenant has its own views DLL that just has “.Views” appended after the assembly name as a convention. The list of reasons for this approach are quite long. The primary motivation is performance. I’ve had quite a few performance issues in the past and I would like to increase my application’s performance in any way that I can. My customized build of Spark removes insignificant whitespace from the HTML output so I can some some bandwidth and load time without having to deal with whitespace removal at runtime.   How to setup Tenants for the Host In the source, I’ve provided a single tenant as a sample (Sample1). This will serve as a template for subsequent tenants in your application. The first step is to add a “PostBuildStep” installer into the project. I’ve defined one in the source that will eventually change as we focus more on the construction of dependency containers. The next step is to tell the project to run the installer and copy the DLL output to a folder in the host that will pick up as a tenant. Here’s the code that will achieve it (this belongs in Post-build event command line field in the Build Events tab of settings) %systemroot%\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v4.0.30319\installutil "$(TargetPath)" copy /Y "$(TargetDir)$(TargetName)*.dll" "$(SolutionDir)Web\Tenants\" copy /Y "$(TargetDir)$(TargetName)*.pdb" "$(SolutionDir)Web\Tenants\" The DLLs with a name starting with the target assembly name will be copied to the “Tenants” folder in the web project. This means something like MultiTenancy.Tenants.Sample1.dll and MultiTenancy.Tenants.Sample1.Views.dll will both be copied along with the debug symbols. This is probably the simplest way to go about this, but it is a tad inflexible. For example, what if you have dependencies? The preferred method would probably be to use IL Merge to merge your dependencies with your target DLL. This would have to be added in the build events. Another way to achieve that would be to simply bypass Visual Studio events and use MSBuild.   I also got a question about how I was setting up the controller factory. Here’s the basics on how I’m setting up tenants inside the host (Global.asax) protected void Application_Start() { RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes); // create a container just to pull in tenants var topContainer = new Container(); topContainer.Configure(config => { config.Scan(scanner => { scanner.AssembliesFromPath(Path.Combine(Server.MapPath("~/"), "Tenants")); scanner.AddAllTypesOf<IApplicationTenant>(); }); }); // create selectors var tenantSelector = new DefaultTenantSelector(topContainer.GetAllInstances<IApplicationTenant>()); var containerSelector = new TenantContainerResolver(tenantSelector); // clear view engines, we don't want anything other than spark ViewEngines.Engines.Clear(); // set view engine ViewEngines.Engines.Add(new TenantViewEngine(tenantSelector)); // set controller factory ControllerBuilder.Current.SetControllerFactory(new ContainerControllerFactory(containerSelector)); } The code to setup the tenants isn’t actually that hard. I’m utilizing assembly scanners in StructureMap as a simple way to pull in DLLs that are not in the AppDomain. Remember that there is a dependency on the host in the tenants and a tenant cannot simply be referenced by a host because of circular dependencies.   Tenant View Engine TenantViewEngine is a simple delegator to the tenant’s specified view engine. You might have noticed that a tenant has to define a view engine. public interface IApplicationTenant { .... IViewEngine ViewEngine { get; } } The trick comes in specifying the view engine on the tenant side. Here’s some of the code that will pull views from the DLL. protected virtual IViewEngine DetermineViewEngine() { var factory = new SparkViewFactory(); var file = GetType().Assembly.CodeBase.Without("file:///").Replace(".dll", ".Views.dll").Replace('/', '\\'); var assembly = Assembly.LoadFile(file); factory.Engine.LoadBatchCompilation(assembly); return factory; } This code resides in an abstract Tenant where the fields are setup in the constructor. This method (inside the abstract class) will load the Views assembly and load the compilation into Spark’s “Descriptors” that will be used to determine views. There is some trickery on determining the file location… but it works just fine.   Up Next There’s just a few big things left such as StructureMap configuring controllers with a convention instead of specifying types directly with container construction and content resolution. I will also try to find a way to use the Web Forms View Engine in a multi-tenant way we achieved with the Spark View Engine without using a virtual path provider. I will probably not use the Web Forms View Engine personally, but I’m sure some people would prefer using WebForms because of the maturity of the engine. As always, I love to take questions by email or on twitter. Suggestions are always welcome as well! (Oh, and here’s another link to the source code).

    Read the article

  • Rendering ASP.NET MVC Views to String

    - by Rick Strahl
    It's not uncommon in my applications that I require longish text output that does not have to be rendered into the HTTP output stream. The most common scenario I have for 'template driven' non-Web text is for emails of all sorts. Logon confirmations and verifications, email confirmations for things like orders, status updates or scheduler notifications - all of which require merged text output both within and sometimes outside of Web applications. On other occasions I also need to capture the output from certain views for logging purposes. Rather than creating text output in code, it's much nicer to use the rendering mechanism that ASP.NET MVC already provides by way of it's ViewEngines - using Razor or WebForms views - to render output to a string. This is nice because it uses the same familiar rendering mechanism that I already use for my HTTP output and it also solves the problem of where to store the templates for rendering this content in nothing more than perhaps a separate view folder. The good news is that ASP.NET MVC's rendering engine is much more modular than the full ASP.NET runtime engine which was a real pain in the butt to coerce into rendering output to string. With MVC the rendering engine has been separated out from core ASP.NET runtime, so it's actually a lot easier to get View output into a string. Getting View Output from within an MVC Application If you need to generate string output from an MVC and pass some model data to it, the process to capture this output is fairly straight forward and involves only a handful of lines of code. The catch is that this particular approach requires that you have an active ControllerContext that can be passed to the view. This means that the following approach is limited to access from within Controller methods. Here's a class that wraps the process and provides both instance and static methods to handle the rendering:/// <summary> /// Class that renders MVC views to a string using the /// standard MVC View Engine to render the view. /// /// Note: This class can only be used within MVC /// applications that have an active ControllerContext. /// </summary> public class ViewRenderer { /// <summary> /// Required Controller Context /// </summary> protected ControllerContext Context { get; set; } public ViewRenderer(ControllerContext controllerContext) { Context = controllerContext; } /// <summary> /// Renders a full MVC view to a string. Will render with the full MVC /// View engine including running _ViewStart and merging into _Layout /// </summary> /// <param name="viewPath"> /// The path to the view to render. Either in same controller, shared by /// name or as fully qualified ~/ path including extension /// </param> /// <param name="model">The model to render the view with</param> /// <returns>String of the rendered view or null on error</returns> public string RenderView(string viewPath, object model) { return RenderViewToStringInternal(viewPath, model, false); } /// <summary> /// Renders a partial MVC view to string. Use this method to render /// a partial view that doesn't merge with _Layout and doesn't fire /// _ViewStart. /// </summary> /// <param name="viewPath"> /// The path to the view to render. Either in same controller, shared by /// name or as fully qualified ~/ path including extension /// </param> /// <param name="model">The model to pass to the viewRenderer</param> /// <returns>String of the rendered view or null on error</returns> public string RenderPartialView(string viewPath, object model) { return RenderViewToStringInternal(viewPath, model, true); } public static string RenderView(string viewPath, object model, ControllerContext controllerContext) { ViewRenderer renderer = new ViewRenderer(controllerContext); return renderer.RenderView(viewPath, model); } public static string RenderPartialView(string viewPath, object model, ControllerContext controllerContext) { ViewRenderer renderer = new ViewRenderer(controllerContext); return renderer.RenderPartialView(viewPath, model); } protected string RenderViewToStringInternal(string viewPath, object model, bool partial = false) { // first find the ViewEngine for this view ViewEngineResult viewEngineResult = null; if (partial) viewEngineResult = ViewEngines.Engines.FindPartialView(Context, viewPath); else viewEngineResult = ViewEngines.Engines.FindView(Context, viewPath, null); if (viewEngineResult == null) throw new FileNotFoundException(Properties.Resources.ViewCouldNotBeFound); // get the view and attach the model to view data var view = viewEngineResult.View; Context.Controller.ViewData.Model = model; string result = null; using (var sw = new StringWriter()) { var ctx = new ViewContext(Context, view, Context.Controller.ViewData, Context.Controller.TempData, sw); view.Render(ctx, sw); result = sw.ToString(); } return result; } } The key is the RenderViewToStringInternal method. The method first tries to find the view to render based on its path which can either be in the current controller's view path or the shared view path using its simple name (PasswordRecovery) or alternately by its full virtual path (~/Views/Templates/PasswordRecovery.cshtml). This code should work both for Razor and WebForms views although I've only tried it with Razor Views. Note that WebForms Views might actually be better for plain text as Razor adds all sorts of white space into its output when there are code blocks in the template. The Web Forms engine provides more accurate rendering for raw text scenarios. Once a view engine is found the view to render can be retrieved. Views in MVC render based on data that comes off the controller like the ViewData which contains the model along with the actual ViewData and ViewBag. From the View and some of the Context data a ViewContext is created which is then used to render the view with. The View picks up the Model and other data from the ViewContext internally and processes the View the same it would be processed if it were to send its output into the HTTP output stream. The difference is that we can override the ViewContext's output stream which we provide and capture into a StringWriter(). After rendering completes the result holds the output string. If an error occurs the error behavior is similar what you see with regular MVC errors - you get a full yellow screen of death including the view error information with the line of error highlighted. It's your responsibility to handle the error - or let it bubble up to your regular Controller Error filter if you have one. To use the simple class you only need a single line of code if you call the static methods. Here's an example of some Controller code that is used to send a user notification to a customer via email in one of my applications:[HttpPost] public ActionResult ContactSeller(ContactSellerViewModel model) { InitializeViewModel(model); var entryBus = new busEntry(); var entry = entryBus.LoadByDisplayId(model.EntryId); if ( string.IsNullOrEmpty(model.Email) ) entryBus.ValidationErrors.Add("Email address can't be empty.","Email"); if ( string.IsNullOrEmpty(model.Message)) entryBus.ValidationErrors.Add("Message can't be empty.","Message"); model.EntryId = entry.DisplayId; model.EntryTitle = entry.Title; if (entryBus.ValidationErrors.Count > 0) { ErrorDisplay.AddMessages(entryBus.ValidationErrors); ErrorDisplay.ShowError("Please correct the following:"); } else { string message = ViewRenderer.RenderView("~/views/template/ContactSellerEmail.cshtml",model, ControllerContext); string title = entry.Title + " (" + entry.DisplayId + ") - " + App.Configuration.ApplicationName; AppUtils.SendEmail(title, message, model.Email, entry.User.Email, false, false)) } return View(model); } Simple! The view in this case is just a plain MVC view and in this case it's a very simple plain text email message (edited for brevity here) that is created and sent off:@model ContactSellerViewModel @{ Layout = null; }re: @Model.EntryTitle @Model.ListingUrl @Model.Message ** SECURITY ADVISORY - AVOID SCAMS ** Avoid: wiring money, cross-border deals, work-at-home ** Beware: cashier checks, money orders, escrow, shipping ** More Info: @(App.Configuration.ApplicationBaseUrl)scams.html Obviously this is a very simple view (I edited out more from this page to keep it brief) -  but other template views are much more complex HTML documents or long messages that are occasionally updated and they are a perfect fit for Razor rendering. It even works with nested partial views and _layout pages. Partial Rendering Notice that I'm rendering a full View here. In the view I explicitly set the Layout=null to avoid pulling in _layout.cshtml for this view. This can also be controlled externally by calling the RenderPartial method instead: string message = ViewRenderer.RenderPartialView("~/views/template/ContactSellerEmail.cshtml",model, ControllerContext); with this line of code no layout page (or _viewstart) will be loaded, so the output generated is just what's in the view. I find myself using Partials most of the time when rendering templates, since the target of templates usually tend to be emails or other HTML fragment like output, so the RenderPartialView() method is definitely useful to me. Rendering without a ControllerContext The preceding class is great when you're need template rendering from within MVC controller actions or anywhere where you have access to the request Controller. But if you don't have a controller context handy - maybe inside a utility function that is static, a non-Web application, or an operation that runs asynchronously in ASP.NET - which makes using the above code impossible. I haven't found a way to manually create a Controller context to provide the ViewContext() what it needs from outside of the MVC infrastructure. However, there are ways to accomplish this,  but they are a bit more complex. It's possible to host the RazorEngine on your own, which side steps all of the MVC framework and HTTP and just deals with the raw rendering engine. I wrote about this process in Hosting the Razor Engine in Non-Web Applications a long while back. It's quite a process to create a custom Razor engine and runtime, but it allows for all sorts of flexibility. There's also a RazorEngine CodePlex project that does something similar. I've been meaning to check out the latter but haven't gotten around to it since I have my own code to do this. The trick to hosting the RazorEngine to have it behave properly inside of an ASP.NET application and properly cache content so templates aren't constantly rebuild and reparsed. Anyway, in the same app as above I have one scenario where no ControllerContext is available: I have a background scheduler running inside of the app that fires on timed intervals. This process could be external but because it's lightweight we decided to fire it right inside of the ASP.NET app on a separate thread. In my app the code that renders these templates does something like this:var model = new SearchNotificationViewModel() { Entries = entries, Notification = notification, User = user }; // TODO: Need logging for errors sending string razorError = null; var result = AppUtils.RenderRazorTemplate("~/views/template/SearchNotificationTemplate.cshtml", model, razorError); which references a couple of helper functions that set up my RazorFolderHostContainer class:public static string RenderRazorTemplate(string virtualPath, object model,string errorMessage = null) { var razor = AppUtils.CreateRazorHost(); var path = virtualPath.Replace("~/", "").Replace("~", "").Replace("/", "\\"); var merged = razor.RenderTemplateToString(path, model); if (merged == null) errorMessage = razor.ErrorMessage; return merged; } /// <summary> /// Creates a RazorStringHostContainer and starts it /// Call .Stop() when you're done with it. /// /// This is a static instance /// </summary> /// <param name="virtualPath"></param> /// <param name="binBasePath"></param> /// <param name="forceLoad"></param> /// <returns></returns> public static RazorFolderHostContainer CreateRazorHost(string binBasePath = null, bool forceLoad = false) { if (binBasePath == null) { if (HttpContext.Current != null) binBasePath = HttpContext.Current.Server.MapPath("~/"); else binBasePath = AppDomain.CurrentDomain.BaseDirectory; } if (_RazorHost == null || forceLoad) { if (!binBasePath.EndsWith("\\")) binBasePath += "\\"; //var razor = new RazorStringHostContainer(); var razor = new RazorFolderHostContainer(); razor.TemplatePath = binBasePath; binBasePath += "bin\\"; razor.BaseBinaryFolder = binBasePath; razor.UseAppDomain = false; razor.ReferencedAssemblies.Add(binBasePath + "ClassifiedsBusiness.dll"); razor.ReferencedAssemblies.Add(binBasePath + "ClassifiedsWeb.dll"); razor.ReferencedAssemblies.Add(binBasePath + "Westwind.Utilities.dll"); razor.ReferencedAssemblies.Add(binBasePath + "Westwind.Web.dll"); razor.ReferencedAssemblies.Add(binBasePath + "Westwind.Web.Mvc.dll"); razor.ReferencedAssemblies.Add("System.Web.dll"); razor.ReferencedNamespaces.Add("System.Web"); razor.ReferencedNamespaces.Add("ClassifiedsBusiness"); razor.ReferencedNamespaces.Add("ClassifiedsWeb"); razor.ReferencedNamespaces.Add("Westwind.Web"); razor.ReferencedNamespaces.Add("Westwind.Utilities"); _RazorHost = razor; _RazorHost.Start(); //_RazorHost.Engine.Configuration.CompileToMemory = false; } return _RazorHost; } The RazorFolderHostContainer essentially is a full runtime that mimics a folder structure like a typical Web app does including caching semantics and compiling code only if code changes on disk. It maps a folder hierarchy to views using the ~/ path syntax. The host is then configured to add assemblies and namespaces. Unfortunately the engine is not exactly like MVC's Razor - the expression expansion and code execution are the same, but some of the support methods like sections, helpers etc. are not all there so templates have to be a bit simpler. There are other folder hosts provided as well to directly execute templates from strings (using RazorStringHostContainer). The following is an example of an HTML email template @inherits RazorHosting.RazorTemplateFolderHost <ClassifiedsWeb.SearchNotificationViewModel> <html> <head> <title>Search Notifications</title> <style> body { margin: 5px;font-family: Verdana, Arial; font-size: 10pt;} h3 { color: SteelBlue; } .entry-item { border-bottom: 1px solid grey; padding: 8px; margin-bottom: 5px; } </style> </head> <body> Hello @Model.User.Name,<br /> <p>Below are your Search Results for the search phrase:</p> <h3>@Model.Notification.SearchPhrase</h3> <small>since @TimeUtils.ShortDateString(Model.Notification.LastSearch)</small> <hr /> You can see that the syntax is a little different. Instead of the familiar @model header the raw Razor  @inherits tag is used to specify the template base class (which you can extend). I took a quick look through the feature set of RazorEngine on CodePlex (now Github I guess) and the template implementation they use is closer to MVC's razor but there are other differences. In the end don't expect exact behavior like MVC templates if you use an external Razor rendering engine. This is not what I would consider an ideal solution, but it works well enough for this project. My biggest concern is the overhead of hosting a second razor engine in a Web app and the fact that here the differences in template rendering between 'real' MVC Razor views and another RazorEngine really are noticeable. You win some, you lose some It's extremely nice to see that if you have a ControllerContext handy (which probably addresses 99% of Web app scenarios) rendering a view to string using the native MVC Razor engine is pretty simple. Kudos on making that happen - as it solves a problem I see in just about every Web application I work on. But it is a bummer that a ControllerContext is required to make this simple code work. It'd be really sweet if there was a way to render views without being so closely coupled to the ASP.NET or MVC infrastructure that requires a ControllerContext. Alternately it'd be nice to have a way for an MVC based application to create a minimal ControllerContext from scratch - maybe somebody's been down that path. I tried for a few hours to come up with a way to make that work but gave up in the soup of nested contexts (MVC/Controller/View/Http). I suspect going down this path would be similar to hosting the ASP.NET runtime requiring a WorkerRequest. Brrr…. The sad part is that it seems to me that a View should really not require much 'context' of any kind to render output to string. Yes there are a few things that clearly are required like paths to the virtual and possibly the disk paths to the root of the app, but beyond that view rendering should not require much. But, no such luck. For now custom RazorHosting seems to be the only way to make Razor rendering go outside of the MVC context… Resources Full ViewRenderer.cs source code from Westwind.Web.Mvc library Hosting the Razor Engine for Non-Web Applications RazorEngine on GitHub© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in ASP.NET   ASP.NET  MVC   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2