Search Results

Search found 37403 results on 1497 pages for 'mvc view testing'.

Page 25/1497 | < Previous Page | 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32  | Next Page >

  • Unit testing statically typed functional code

    - by back2dos
    I wanted to ask you people, in which cases it makes sense to unit test statically typed functional code, as written in haskell, scala, ocaml, nemerle, f# or haXe (the last is what I am really interested in, but I wanted to tap into the knowledge of the bigger communities). I ask this because from my understanding: One aspect of unit tests is to have the specs in runnable form. However when employing a declarative style, that directly maps the formalized specs to language semantics, is it even actually possible to express the specs in runnable form in a separate way, that adds value? The more obvious aspect of unit tests is to track down errors that cannot be revealed through static analysis. Given that type safe functional code is a good tool to code extremely close to what your static analyzer understands. However a simple mistake like using x instead of y (both being coordinates) in your code cannot be covered. However such a mistake could also arise while writing the test code, so I am not sure whether its worth the effort. Unit tests do introduce redundancy, which means that when requirements change, the code implementing them and the tests covering this code must both be changed. This overhead of course is about constant, so one could argue, that it doesn't really matter. In fact, in languages like Ruby it really doesn't compared to the benefits, but given how statically typed functional programming covers a lot of the ground unit tests are intended for, it feels like it's a constant overhead one can simply reduce without penalty. From this I'd deduce that unit tests are somewhat obsolete in this programming style. Of course such a claim can only lead to religious wars, so let me boil this down to a simple question: When you use such a programming style, to which extents do you use unit tests and why (what quality is it you hope to gain for your code)? Or the other way round: do you have criteria by which you can qualify a unit of statically typed functional code as covered by the static analyzer and hence needs no unit test coverage?

    Read the article

  • Is paying programmers to "test" for bugs normal? [on hold]

    - by user106277
    I recently hired a programming team to do a port of my iPad app to the iPhone and Android platforms. I also wanted them to implement a bunch of tips on how to play the app, similar like you would find in Candy Crush or Cut the Rope. They want to charge 12 hours @ $35/hr for the "Testing all of the Tips", telling me that normally it would take them more than 25 hours but that they will 'bear the difference'. I have never heard of this, but maybe it's a new practice? I am used to devs doing their own quality control, and then having a testing/acceptance period... Am I missing something? Thanks for any help and advice you can give!

    Read the article

  • Large sparse (stiff) ODE system needed for testing

    - by macydanim
    I hope this is the right place for this question. I have been working on a sparse stiff implicit ODE solver and have finished the code so far. I now tested the solver with the Van der Pol equation, and another stiff problem, which is of dimension 4. But to perform better tests I am searching for a bigger system. I'm thinking of the order N = 100...1000, if possible stiff and sparse. Does anybody have an example I could use? I really don't know where to search.

    Read the article

  • mocha testing for the lazies, single key-press for all possible tests

    - by laggingreflex
    I have a batch file that lists all the test files I have and asks me which test I want to perform, like Test. [U]nit, [I]ntegration : i (user input) Integration. [A]ll, [2][U]serInteraction, [3][R]esultGeneration : u 2 User Interaction. Running "mocha integration\2userint.js" ... So essentially I have configured a batch "option" for each test file I have, which I can choose to run individually or all together. But adding and removing tests is a pain. Is there something that does this or anything like this automatically? Like reads all the files and asks me which file(s) I want to test. A GUI with checkboxes would be ultimate! but I'll take anything. I'm working in node.js

    Read the article

  • OOP for unit testing : The good, the bad and the ugly

    - by Jeff
    I have recently read Miško Hevery's pdf guide to writing testable code in which its stated that you should limit your classes instanciations in your constructors. I understand that its what you should do because it allow you to easily mock you objects that are send as parameters to your class. But when it comes to writing actual code, i often end up with things like that (exemple is in PHP using Zend Framework but I think it's self explanatory) : class Some_class { private $_data; private $_options; private $_locale; public function __construct($data, $options = null) { $this->_data = $data; if ($options != null) { $this->_options = $options; } $this->_init(); } private function _init() { if(isset($this->_options['locale'])) { $locale = $this->_options['locale']; if ($locale instanceof Zend_Locale) { $this->_locale = $locale; } elseif (Zend_Locale::isLocale($locale)) { $this->_locale = new Zend_Locale($locale); } else { $this->_locale = new Zend_Locale(); } } } } Acording to my understanding of Miško Hevery's guide, i shouldn't instanciate the Zend_Local in my class but push it through the constructor (Which can be done through the options array in my example). I am wondering what would be the best practice to get the most flexibility for unittesing this code and aswell, if I want to move away from Zend Framework. Thanks in advance

    Read the article

  • Android Live Testing

    - by Matthew Dockerty
    I am making a game for android and in it I am using sensors which are not available in the emulator. At the moment I am connecting my device and transferring the apk, then installing to test but that is a pain to do, and I have gotten to the stage where I need to start logging values for debugging. I have gone into the run configs of my app and set it to prompt me to pick a device, but my device is never in the list when it is connected to my PC and I try to run it. How am I supposed to set it up to work properly? Thanks for the help.

    Read the article

  • Who does code coverage testing?

    - by Athiruban
    Recently, I was given an opportunity to increase the code coverage in a project based on Java Swing, MySQL and other technologies. They told me to bring the code coverage to 100%, while it was only 45% at the time I joined. I am just starting, not a professional developer, right from the beginning I felt bad even though I write and understand computer programs well. (The developed code contains a lot of technical stuff like Generics and no documentation about the code is available.) Has anyone experienced the same situation before? Please tell who is the right person to do the job.

    Read the article

  • Using Mock for event listeners in unit-testing

    - by phtrivier
    I keep getting to test this kind of code (language irrelevant) : public class Foo() { public Foo(Dependency1 dep1) { this.dep1 = dep1; } public void setUpListeners() { this.dep1.addSomeEventListener(.... some listener code ...); } } Typically, you want to test what when the dependency fires the event, the class under tests reacts appropriately (in some situation, the only purpose of such classes is to wire lots of other components, that can be independently tested. So far, to test this, I always end up doing something like : creating a 'stub' that implements both a addXXXXListener, that simply stores the callback, and a fireXXXX, that simply calls any registered listener. This is a bit tedious since you have to create the mock with the right interface, but that can do use an introspective framework that can 'spy' on a method, and inject the real dependency in tests Is there a cleaner way to do this kind of things ?

    Read the article

  • Automated Website Testing/Sanity/Quality

    - by Jeff
    I am thinking about building a tool that starts from the root of a webpage and traverses the entire website gathering a list of resources such as CSS/HTML/Javascript files and then runs CSS/Javascript Lint + HTML Validator + Broken Link Finder. Before I start building something like this, I was wondering if this exists already? Thanks. I already searched Google quite a bit and couldn't find much.

    Read the article

  • Rebuilding CoasterBuzz, Part IV: Dependency injection, it's what's for breakfast

    - by Jeff
    (Repost from my personal blog.) This is another post in a series about rebuilding one of my Web sites, which has been around for 12 years. I hope to relaunch soon. More: Part I: Evolution, and death to WCF Part II: Hot data objects Part III: The architecture using the "Web stack of love" If anything generally good for the craft has come out of the rise of ASP.NET MVC, it's that people are more likely to use dependency injection, and loosely couple the pieces parts of their applications. A lot of the emphasis on coding this way has been to facilitate unit testing, and that's awesome. Unit testing makes me feel a lot less like a hack, and a lot more confident in what I'm doing. Dependency injection is pretty straight forward. It says, "Given an instance of this class, I need instances of other classes, defined not by their concrete implementations, but their interfaces." Probably the first place a developer exercises this in when having a class talk to some kind of data repository. For a very simple example, pretend the FooService has to get some Foo. It looks like this: public class FooService {    public FooService(IFooRepository fooRepo)    {       _fooRepo = fooRepo;    }    private readonly IFooRepository _fooRepo;    public Foo GetMeFoo()    {       return _fooRepo.FooFromDatabase();    } } When we need the FooService, we ask the dependency container to get it for us. It says, "You'll need an IFooRepository in that, so let me see what that's mapped to, and put it in there for you." Why is this good for you? It's good because your FooService doesn't know or care about how you get some foo. You can stub out what the methods and properties on a fake IFooRepository might return, and test just the FooService. I don't want to get too far into unit testing, but it's the most commonly cited reason to use DI containers in MVC. What I wanted to mention is how there's another benefit in a project like mine, where I have to glue together a bunch of stuff. For example, when I have someone sign up for a new account on CoasterBuzz, I'm actually using POP Forums' new account mailer, which composes a bunch of text that includes a link to verify your account. The thing is, I want to use custom text and some other logic that's specific to CoasterBuzz. To accomplish this, I make a new class that inherits from the forum's NewAccountMailer, and override some stuff. Easy enough. Then I use Ninject, the DI container I'm using, to unbind the forum's implementation, and substitute my own. Ninject uses something called a NinjectModule to bind interfaces to concrete implementations. The forum has its own module, and then the CoasterBuzz module is loaded second. The CB module has two lines of code to swap out the mailer implementation: Unbind<PopForums.Email.INewAccountMailer>(); Bind<PopForums.Email.INewAccountMailer>().To<CbNewAccountMailer>(); Piece of cake! Now, when code asks the DI container for an INewAccountMailer, it gets my custom implementation instead. This is a lot easier to deal with than some of the alternatives. I could do some copy-paste, but then I'm not using well-tested code from the forum. I could write stuff from scratch, but then I'm throwing away a bunch of logic I've already written (in this case, stuff around e-mail, e-mail settings, mail delivery failures). There are other places where the DI container comes in handy. For example, CoasterBuzz does a number of custom things with user profiles, and special content for paid members. It uses the forum as the core piece to managing users, so I can ask the container to get me instances of classes that do user lookups, for example, and have zero care about how the forum handles database calls, configuration, etc. What a great world to live in, compared to ten years ago. Sure, the primary interest in DI is around the "separation of concerns" and facilitating unit testing, but as your library grows and you use more open source, it starts to be the glue that pulls everything together.

    Read the article

  • Best method to do A B testing across to subdomains

    - by Lior
    I want to do an A B test of an entire site for a new design and UX with only slight changes in content (a big brand site that has good Google rankings for many generic keywords. My idea of implementation is doing a 302 redirect to the new version (placing it on www1 subdomain) and allowing only user agents of known browsers to pass. The test version will have disallow all in the robots text. Will Google treat this favorably or do I have to use Google Website Optimizer (which will give me tracking headaches)?

    Read the article

  • Unit-testing code that relies on untestable 3rd party code

    - by DudeOnRock
    Sometimes, especially when working with third party code, I write unit-test specific code in my production code. This happens when third party code uses singletons, relies on constants, accesses the file-system/a resource I don't want to access in a test situation, or overuses inheritance. The form my unit-test specific code takes is usually the following: if (accessing or importing a certain resource fails) I assume this is a test case and load a mock object Is this poor form, and if it is, what is normally done when writing tests for code that uses untestable third party code?

    Read the article

  • Which PHP frameworks use in testing?

    - by EasyHB
    I am going to do a test/benchmark of some PHP frameworks. The main factor of comaparation will be a comunication with MySQL databases and CRUD operations with them. I'll also compare their documentation, comunity support, etc. So I made a list of some known frameworks and I'll be glad if someone can tell me which I should not use or which I forgot to include. Zend Framework CodeIgniter Symphony Yii Kohana Prado CakePHP Nette PhpBURN Akelos Recess Jelix DooPHP Qcodo Seagull Thx for every help.

    Read the article

  • Cheap server stress testing

    - by acrosman
    The IT department of the nonprofit organization I work for recently got a new virtual server running CentOS (with Apache and PHP 5), which is supposed to host our website. During the process of setting up the server I discovered that the slightest use of the new machine caused major performance problems (I couldn't extract tarballs without bringing it to a halt). After several weeks of casting about in the dark by tech support, it now appears to be working fine, but I'm still nervous about moving the main site there. I have no budget to work with (so no software or services that require money), although due to recent cut backs I have several older desktops that I could use if it helps. The site doesn't need to withstand massive amounts of traffic (it's a Drupal site just a few thousand visitors a day), but I would like to put it through a bit of it paces before moving the main site over. What are cheap tools that I can use to get a sense if the server can withstand even low levels of traffic? I'm not looking to test the site itself yet, just fundamental operation of the server.

    Read the article

  • Separate Action from Assertion in Unit Tests

    - by DigitalMoss
    Setup Many years ago I took to a style of unit testing that I have come to like a lot. In short, it uses a base class to separate out the Arrangement, Action and Assertion of the test into separate method calls. You do this by defining method calls in [Setup]/[TestInitialize] that will be called before each test run. [Setup] public void Setup() { before_each(); //arrangement because(); //action } This base class usually includes the [TearDown] call as well for when you are using this setup for Integration tests. [TearDown] public void Cleanup() { after_each(); } This often breaks out into a structure where the test classes inherit from a series of Given classes that put together the setup (i.e. GivenFoo : GivenBar : WhenDoingBazz) with the Assertions being one line tests with a descriptive name of what they are covering [Test] public void ThenBuzzSouldBeTrue() { Assert.IsTrue(result.Buzz); } The Problem There are very few tests that wrap around a single action so you end up with lots of classes so recently I have taken to defining the action in a series of methods within the test class itself: [Test] public void ThenBuzzSouldBeTrue() { because_an_action_was_taken(); Assert.IsTrue(result.Buzz); } private void because_an_action_was_taken() { //perform action here } This results in several "action" methods within the test class but allows grouping of similar tests (i.e. class == WhenTestingDifferentWaysToSetBuzz) The Question Does someone else have a better way of separating out the three 'A's of testing? Readability of tests is important to me so I would prefer that, when a test fails, that the very naming structure of the tests communicate what has failed. If someone can read the Inheritance structure of the tests and have a good idea why the test might be failing then I feel it adds a lot of value to the tests (i.e. GivenClient : GivenUser : WhenModifyingUserPermissions : ThenReadAccessShouldBeTrue). I am aware of Acceptance Testing but this is more on a Unit (or series of units) level with boundary layers mocked. EDIT : My question is asking if there is an event or other method for executing a block of code before individual tests (something that could be applied to specific sets of tests without it being applied to all tests within a class like [Setup] currently does. Barring the existence of this event, which I am fairly certain doesn't exist, is there another method for accomplishing the same thing? Using [Setup] for every case presents a problem either way you go. Something like [Action("Category")] (a setup method that applied to specific tests within the class) would be nice but I can't find any way of doing this.

    Read the article

  • Should developers be involved in testing phases?

    - by LudoMC
    Hi, we are using a classical V-shaped development process. We then have requirements, architecture, design, implementation, integration tests, system tests and acceptance. Testers are preparing test cases during the first phases of the project. The issue is that, due to resources issues (*), test phases are too long and are often shortened due to time constraints (you know project managers... ;)). So my question is simple: should developers be involved in the tests phases and isn't it too 'dangerous'. I'm afraid it will give the project managers a false feeling of better quality as the work has been done but would the added man.days be of any value? I'm not really confident of developers doing tests (no offense here but we all know it's quite hard to break in a few clicks what you have made in severals days). Thanks for sharing your thoughts. (*) For obscure reasons, increasing the number of testers is not an option as of today. (Just upfront, it's not a duplicate of Should programmers help testers in designing tests? which talks about test preparation and not test execution, where we avoid the implication of developers)

    Read the article

  • DRY, string, and unit testing

    - by Rodrigue
    I have a recurring question when writing unit tests for code that involves constant string values. Let's take an example of a method/function that does some processing and returns a string containing a pre-defined constant. In python, that would be something like: STRING_TEMPLATE = "/some/constant/string/with/%s/that/needs/interpolation/" def process(some_param): # We do some meaningful work that gives us a value result = _some_meaningful_action() return STRING_TEMPLATE % result If I want to unit test process, one of my tests will check the return value. This is where I wonder what the best solution is. In my unit test, I can: apply DRY and use the already defined constant repeat myself and rewrite the entire string def test_foo_should_return_correct_url(): string_result = process() # Applying DRY and using the already defined constant assert STRING_TEMPLATE % "1234" == string_result # Repeating myself, repeating myself assert "/some/constant/string/with/1234/that/needs/interpolation/" == url The advantage I see in the former is that my test will break if I put the wrong string value in my constant. The inconvenient is that I may be rewriting the same string over and over again across different unit tests.

    Read the article

  • MVC design patterns

    - by insane-36
    I have an application and it does not use a very good structure. However it seems to me that I have tried to stick to mvc design pattern but a senior engineer claims that I have no design patterns and code are mesh. How I have structured the code : I have couple of nsmanagedobject model classes which represents model in my case and a reskit library which encapsulates the nsurlconnection and url request. I fetch the request from the view controller itself and then when the request get completed I create predicate and then populate it in tableview. Wherever I need custom view either I create it in nib or create in a custom subclass of UIView. I have use delegation pattern and notification to communication to view controller, views and block callback with restkit. But, the senior engineer is very new to ios. He has been doing it for 2 months now but he is a good java programmer. So, what is mvc pattern ? Is core data model not working as a model objects, view controller as controller and views. I dont seem to find any other places or any other cases to create my own model object since the most of the models are used as NSManagedObject subclass.

    Read the article

  • Testing my model for hybrid scheduling in Embedded Systems

    - by markusian
    I am working on a project for school, where I have to analyze the performances of a few fixed-priority servers algorithms (polling server, deferrable server, priority exchange) using a simulator in the case of hybrid scheduling, where we have both hard periodic tasks and soft aperiodic tasks. In my model I consider that: the hard tasks have a period equal to their deadline, with a known worst case execution time (wcet). The actual execution time could be smaller than the wcet. the soft tasks have a known wcet and random interarrival times. The actual execution time could be smaller than the wcet. In order to test those algorithms I need realistic case studies. For this reason I'm digging in the scientific literature but I am facing different problems: Sometimes I find a list of hard tasks with wcet, but it is not specified how the soft tasks parameters are found. Given the wcet of a task, how can I model its actual execution time? This means, what random distribution should I use considering the wcet? How can I model the random interarrival times of soft aperiodic tasks?

    Read the article

  • Unit testing multiple conditions in an IF statement

    - by bwalk2895
    I have a chunk of code that looks something like this: function bool PassesBusinessRules() { bool meetsBusinessRules = false; if (PassesBusinessRule1 && PassesBusinessRule2 && PassesBusinessRule3) { meetsBusinessRules= true; } return meetsBusinessRules; } I believe there should be four unit tests for this particular function. Three to test each of the conditions in the if statement and ensure it returns false. And another test that makes sure the function returns true. Question: Should there actually be ten unit tests instead? Nine that checks each of the possible failure paths. IE: False False False False False True False True False And so on for each possible combination. I think that is overkill, but some of the other members on my team do not. The way I look at it is if BusinessRule1 fails then it should always return false, it doesn't matter if it was checked first or last.

    Read the article

  • Web Form Testing [closed]

    - by Frank G.
    I created a application for a client that is along the lines of a ticket tracking system. I wanted to know if anyone know of software that could beta test the web forms. Well I am looking for something that could automatically populate/fill whatever forms are on the web page with generic data. The purpose of this is to just randomly populate data and see if I get any errors on the page when submitted plus to also see how validation for the form functions. Does anyone know of anything that could do this?

    Read the article

  • iPad Split View Controller - Master View and Detial View contain TableViews

    - by vman9999
    Hi, I've managed to read some values into a table view and display them in the Master View of a SplitViewController. What I would like to do is to tap on a row of the Master View and display the details on the detailViewController but in a TableView. When I tap on the row in the MasterView table, I can't seem to get the detail to populate the detailview TableView. Any suggestions? Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC - Html.DropDownList - Value not set via ViewData.Model

    - by chrisb
    Have just started playing with ASP.NET MVC and have stumbled over the following situation. It feels a lot like a bug but if its not, an explanation would be appreciated :) The View contains pretty basic stuff <%=Html.DropDownList("MyList", ViewData["MyListItems"] as SelectList)%> <%=Html.TextBox("MyTextBox")%> When not using a model, the value and selected item are set as expected: //works fine public ActionResult MyAction(){ ViewData["MyListItems"] = new SelectList(items, "Value", "Text"); //items is an ienumerable of {Value="XXX", Text="YYY"} ViewData["MyList"] = "XXX"; //set the selected item to be the one with value 'XXX' ViewData["MyTextBox"] = "ABC"; //sets textbox value to 'ABC' return View(); } But when trying to load via a model, the textbox has the value set as expected, but the dropdown doesnt get a selected item set. //doesnt work public ActionResult MyAction(){ ViewData["MyListItems"] = new SelectList(items, "Value", "Text"); //items is an ienumerable of {Value="XXX", Text="YYY"} var model = new { MyList = "XXX", //set the selected item to be the one with value 'XXX' MyTextBox = "ABC" //sets textbox value to 'ABC' } return View(model); } Any ideas? My current thoughts on it are that perhaps when using a model, we're restricted to setting the selected item on the SelectList constructor instead of using the viewdata (which works fine) and passing the selectlist in with the model - which would have the benefit of cleaning the code up a little - I'm just wondering why this method doesnt work.... Many thanks for any suggestions

    Read the article

  • Reuse security code between WCF and MVC.NET

    - by mrjoltcola
    First the background: I jumped into MVC.NET from the Java MVC world, so my implementation below is possibly cheating, I don't know. I avoided fooling with a custom membership provider and I just implemented the base code needed to authenticate and load roles in my LogOn action. Typically I just need to check roles programatically, and have no use for all of the other membership features, so I didn't originally think I needed a full Membership provider. I have a successful WCF project with a custom authentication and authorization layer that I did at least write per the proper API. I implemented it with custom IPrincipal, UserNamePasswordValidator and IAuthorizationPolicy classes to load from an Oracle database. In my WCF services, I use declarative security: [PrincipalPermission(SecurityAction.Demand, Role="ADMIN")]. The question (on the ASP.NET/MCV.NET side): All my reading indicates I should implement a custom Membership/Roles provider, and use [Authorize(Roles="ADMIN")] on my controller actions. At this point, I don't have a true Membership provider, but I'm using the same User class that implements the IPrincipal interface that works with the WCF security. I plan to share common code between the WCF and ASP.NET modules. So my LogOn action is not using the FormsService (and I assume this is bad). I had commented it out, and just used my "UserService" to access the Oracle db. Note my "TODO" comment below. public ActionResult LogOn(LogOnModel model, string returnUrl) { log.Info("Login attempt by " + model.UserName); if (ModelState.IsValid) { User user = userService.findByUserName(model.UserName); // Commented original MemberShipService code, this is probably bad // if (MembershipService.ValidateUser(model.UserName, model.Password)) if (user != null && user.Authenticate(model.Password) == true) { log.Info("Login success by " + model.UserName); FormsService.SignIn(model.UserName, model.RememberMe); // TODO: Override with Custom identity / roles? user.AddRoles(userService.listRolesByUser(user)); // pull in roles from db if (!String.IsNullOrEmpty(returnUrl)) return Redirect(returnUrl); else return RedirectToAction("Index", "Home"); } else { log.Info("Login failure by " + model.UserName); ModelState.AddModelError("", "The user name or password provided is incorrect."); } } // If we got this far, something failed, redisplay form return View(model); } So can I make the above work? Can I stick the IPrincipal (User) into the CurrentContext or HttpContext? Can I integrate the custom IPrincipal I've already created without writing a full Membership/Roles Provider? I currently stick the User object into the session and access it from all MVC.NET controllers with "CurrentUser" property which grabs it from the session on demand. But this doesn't work with the [Authorize] attribute; I assume that is because it knows nothing about my custom Principal in the session, and is instead using whatever FormsService.SignIn() produces. I also found that session timeouts screw up the login redirect, the user doesn't get forwarded, instead we get a null exception accessing User from the session, and I assume it is related to my "skipping steps" to get a quick implementation. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • MVC controller is being called twice

    - by rboarman
    Hello, I have a controller that is being called twice from an ActionLink call. My home page has a link, that when clicked calls the Index method on the Play controller. An id of 100 is passed into the method. I think this is what is causing the issue. More on this below. Here are some code snippets: Home page: <%= Html.ActionLink(“Click Me”, "Index", "Play", new { id = 100 }, null) %> Play Controller: public ActionResult Index(int? id) { var settings = new Dictionary<string, string>(); settings.Add("Id", id.ToString()); ViewData["InitParams"] = settings.ToInitParams(); return View(); } Play view: <%@ Page Title="" Language="C#" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage" %> (html <head> omitted for brevity) <body> <form id="form1" runat="server" style="height:100%"> Hello </form> </body> If I get rid of the parameter to the Index method, everything is fine. If I leave the parameter in place, then the Index method is called with 100 as the id. After returning the View, the method is called a second time with a parameter of null. I can’t seem to figure out what is triggering the second call. My first thought was to add a specific route like this: routes.MapRoute( "Play", // Route name "Play/{id}", // URL with parameters new {controller = "Play", action = "Index"} // Parameter defaults ); This had no effect other than making a prettier looking link. I am not sure where to go from here. Thank you in advance. Rick

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32  | Next Page >