Search Results

Search found 755 results on 31 pages for 'submitting'.

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

  • Need Help with .NET OpenId HttpHandler

    - by Mark E
    I'm trying to use a single HTTPHandler to authenticate a user's open id and receive a claimresponse. The initial authentication works, but the claimresponse does not. The error I receive is "This webpage has a redirect loop." What am I doing wrong? public class OpenIdLogin : IHttpHandler { private HttpContext _context = null; public void ProcessRequest(HttpContext context) { _context = context; var openid = new OpenIdRelyingParty(); var response = openid.GetResponse(); if (response == null) { // Stage 2: user submitting Identifier openid.CreateRequest(context.Request.Form["openid_identifier"]).RedirectToProvider(); } else { // Stage 3: OpenID Provider sending assertion response switch (response.Status) { case AuthenticationStatus.Authenticated: //FormsAuthentication.RedirectFromLoginPage(response.ClaimedIdentifier, false); string identifier = response.ClaimedIdentifier; //****** TODO only proceed if we don't have the user's extended info in the database ************** ClaimsResponse claim = response.GetExtension<ClaimsResponse>(); if (claim == null) { //IAuthenticationRequest req = openid.CreateRequest(identifier); IAuthenticationRequest req = openid.CreateRequest(Identifier.Parse(identifier)); var fields = new ClaimsRequest(); fields.Email = DemandLevel.Request; req.AddExtension(fields); req.RedirectingResponse.Send(); //Is this correct? } else { context.Response.ContentType = "text/plain"; context.Response.Write(claim.Email); //claim.FullName; } break; case AuthenticationStatus.Canceled: //TODO break; case AuthenticationStatus.Failed: //TODO break; } } }

    Read the article

  • UI - How I can make users effectively read what my program says?

    - by Magnetic_dud
    I have a simple form that searches through the 2000+ issues of a 3rd party webcomic. (Easy, it's like xkcd: http://url/number That form is as easy as possible, is like this: What number do you want? User writes a number, clicks ok, and goes on the 3rd party website on a new tab Then, my form asks a question: "Did you find that issue memorable? Enter the name here, and we will add it to the "best issues" in home page" When the user will write the name of the issue, it is added to the database (pending moderation by me) So, I supposed this design is the easiest and convenient that users can find. Unfortunately, NONE of the users (maybe a 2% behaved correctly) will actually read what I asked. Some of the issues are offline, and gives a 404. On that issues users will write in the textbox a completely wrong title, and correctly capitalized! It's like if i would name http://xkcd.com/627/ as "The Great Adventures of Jack Smith" Users are from around all over the country, with different browsers, and have a different cookie. I cannot believe that my users will not read what I ask, it is a WHITE PAGE with a button that disappears when clicked and a textbox.... easier than that??? Maybe i should put a checkbox with "I acknowledge that this form is for submitting memorable issues, not for fun"? Oh, who will read that? Or maybe i could enable the textbox only if the user has effectively clicked the link?

    Read the article

  • "date_part('epoch', now() at time zone 'UTC')" not the same time as "now() at time zone 'UTC'" in po

    - by sirlark
    I'm writing a web based front end to a database (PHP/Postgresql) in which I need to store various dates/times. The times are meant to be always be entered on the client side in the local time, and displayed in the local time too. For storage purposes, I store all dates/times as integers (UNIX timestamps) and normalised to UTC. One particular field has a restriction that the timestamp filled in is not allowed to be in the future, so I tried this with a database constraint... CONSTRAINT not_future CHECK (timestamp-300 <= date_part('epoch', now() at time zone 'UTC')) The -300 is to give 5 minutes leeway in case of slightly desynchronised times between browser and server. The problem is, this constraint always fails when submitting the current time. I've done testing, and found the following. In PostgreSQL client: SELECT now() -- returns correct local time SELECT date_part('epoch', now()) -- returns a unix timestamp at UTC (tested by feeding the value into the date function in PHP correcting for its compensation to my time zone) SELECT date_part('epoch', now() at time zone 'UTC') -- returns a unix timestamp at two time zone offsets west, e.g. I am at GMT+2, I get a GMT-2 timestamp. I've figured out obviously that dropping the "at time zone 'UTC'" will solve my problem, but my question is if 'epoch' is meant to return a unix timestamp which AFAIK is always meant to be in UTC, why would the 'epoch' of a time already in UTC be corrected? Is this a bug, or I am I missing something about the defined/normal behaviour here.

    Read the article

  • Rails: Added new Action in Controller, but there is no path?

    - by Newbie
    Hello! I try to do following: A user is on his profile page. Now he edits his profile. He klicks on update and the data is saved. Now I want to redirect the user to another kind of profile-edit-page. I did the following in my users_controller.rb: def update @user = User.find(params[:id]) respond_to do |format| if @user.update_attributes(params[:user]) flash[:notice] = 'User was successfully updated.' if(@user.team_id != nil) format.html { redirect_to(@user) } else format.html { redirect_to choose_team_path } end format.xml { head :ok } else format.html { render :action => "edit" } format.xml { render :xml => @user.errors, :status => :unprocessable_entity } end end end def choose_team @user = User.find(params[:id]) end I created a view: /users/choose_team.html.erb Now I get the following error: undefined local variable or method `choose_team_path' for #<UsersController:0x1f56650> So I added choose_team to my routes.rb: map.choose_team 'choose-team', :controller => 'users', :action => 'choose_team' Now, after submitting my first edit form, it redirects me to http://localhost:3000/choose-team and I get following error: Couldn't find User without an ID What I want: If a user has no team_id, he should be redirected to my choose_team.html.erb for choosing a team, else he should be redirected to his profile/show. How to do this?

    Read the article

  • Sending data back to Controller Spring-MVC

    - by Umesh Awasthi
    I am not sure if this is a complex problem but as a starting person this seems a bit complex to me. I have an object based on which i need to show some values on the UI and let user select some of them, i need to send data back to another controller when user click on the submit button.Here is the structure of my data object public class PrsData{ private Map<String, List<PrsCDData>> prsCDData; } public class PrsCDData{ private Map<String, Collection<ConfiguredDesignData>> configuredDesignData; } public ConfiguredDesignData{ // simple fields } I have set the object in model before showing the view like model.addAttribute("prsData", productData.getPrData()); In the form i have following settings <form:form method="post" commandName="prsData" action="${addProductToCartAction}" > <form:hidden path="prsCDData['${prsCDDataMap.key}'] [${status.index}].configuredDesignData['${configuredDesignDataMap.key}'] [${configuredDesignDataStatus.index}].code"/> <form:hidden path="prsCDData['${prsCDDataMap.key}'] [${status.index}].configuredDesignData['${configuredDesignDataMap.key}'] [${configuredDesignDataStatus.index}].description"/> </form:form> This is what i have at AddProductToCartController public String addToCart(@RequestParam("productCodePost") final String code, @ModelAttribute("prsData") final PrsData prsData, final Model model, @RequestParam(value = "qty", required = false, defaultValue = "1") final long qty) On submitting the form i am getting following exception org.springframework.beans.NullValueInNestedPathException: Invalid property 'prsCDData[Forced][0]' of bean class [com.product.data.PrsData]: Cannot access indexed value of property referenced in indexed property path 'prsCDData[Forced][0]': returned null It seems like its trying to access the values on this controller while i am trying to send value to that controller and trying to create same object with selected values Can any one tell me where i am doing wrong and what i need to take care of

    Read the article

  • My IF statement is changing variables in PHP

    - by user1902509
    I am fairly new to the whole programming thing, so forgive me if this is a stupid question. It seems odd that I haven't run into it before. I am trying to make an order form for a cake. You fill out the form, submit it, and it will then display the order in a new window, where you then hit "submit," and upload it to the Database. I have a series of If Statements to check for errors in the form before submitting it. Here is a simplified version of the code. Writing means any writing you want on the cake, Name is your name, and cake is what type of cake you want (the default is "None"). try { $name = trim($params->name); $cake = trim($params->cake); $writing = trim($params->writing); if (strlen($name) < 3){ throw new Exception("Please enter Your name."); } if ($cake = "None") { throw new Exception("Please select a Cake" } if ($cake = "Caramel Apple Pie" or $cake = "Pumpkin Pie" or $cake = "Eggnog Pie" and strlen($writing) > 1) { throw new Exception("We are sorry, but you can't write on any of our specialty pies."); } } catch(Exception $x) { $error = $x->getmessage(); } So what is happening is that when I go and hit submit the first time, the correct cake type comes up, but when you submit it the second time, the error comes up saying that I have "None" selected. All the other values are there and remain the same. I think the problem is that the first "IF" statement (Where it says "If($cake = "None")) is automatically changing $cake to "None" because I have tried commenting just that statement out, and it will then change the cake to be "Caramel Apple Pie," which is in the top of the next IF statement. Anyone know why it is doing this? And how to fix it?

    Read the article

  • Keeping user data persistent after validates_presence_of

    - by mathee
    I'm designing a question-and-answer Ruby on Rails application. After a user logs in, you can see a list of questions posed by other users. I have a link next to each of the questions to /answers/new?question_id=someNumber. That links to a page that displays the question (to remind the "answerer") above a standard form for submitting your answer. In order to display the question, I call @question = Question.find_by_id(params[:question_id]) and reference @question in the Haml view file: Question details %h2 #{h @question.title} #{h @question.description} %br/ %br/ %h1 Your answer - form_for(@answer) do |f| = f.error_messages %p = f.label :description, "Enter your response here" %br = f.text_area :description = f.hidden_field "question", :value => @question.id %p = f.submit 'Answer' The problem is that if I check validates_presence_of :description in Answer.rb, then I lose question_id if the user did not input anything into the description field when the page reloads, so I can't re-display the question for which the user is answering. How should I fix this? Is there a better way of storing the question the user is trying to answer so that I can display it above the form for entering a new answer (and perhaps in other views in the future)? If you need to see more code, please let me know.

    Read the article

  • Extending jQuery Form Validation Script for new form fields

    - by user982124
    I have a simple HTML form that originally was a series of Questions (A1 to A5 and B1 to B3) with yes/no radio buttons like this: <tr> <td width="88%" valign="top" class="field_name_left">A1</td> <td width="12%" valign="top" class="field_data"> <input type="radio" name="CriteriaA1" value="Yes">Yes<input type="radio" name="CriteriaA1" value="No">No</td> </tr> The user could only answer either the A series of questions OR either the B series of questions, but not both. Also they must complete all questions in either the A or B series. I now have an additional series of questions - C1 to C6 - and need to extend my validation scripts to ensure the user enters either A, B or C and answers all questions within each series. My original script for just the A and B looks like this: $(function() { $("#editRecord").submit(function(){ // is anything checked? if(!checkEmpty()){ $("#error").html("Please check something before submitting"); //alert("nothing Checked"); return false; } // Only A _OR_ B if(isAorB()){ $("#error").html("Please complete A or B, not both"); //alert("please complete A or B, not both"); return false; }; // all A's or all B's if(allAorBChecked()){ $("#error").html("It appears you have not completed all questions"); //alert("missing data"); return false; }; if(haveNo()){ // we're going on, but sending "type = C" } //alert("all OK"); return true; }); }); function checkEmpty(){ var OK = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ if (this.checked){ OK = true; } }); return OK; } function isAorB(){ var OK = false; var Achecked = false; var Bchecked = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ var theChar=this.name.charAt(8); // if we have an A checked remember it if(theChar == "A" && this.checked && !Achecked){ Achecked = true; } if(Achecked && theChar == "B" && !Bchecked){ if(this.checked){ Bchecked = true; } } if (Achecked && Bchecked){ OK = true; } }); return OK; } function allAorBChecked(){ var notOK = false; var Achecked = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ // skip through to see if we're doing A's or B's var theChar=this.name.charAt(8); // check the A's if(theChar == "A" && this.checked && !Achecked){ Achecked = true; } }); if(Achecked){ // set the input to A $("#type").val("A"); // check _all_ a's are checked var thisName; var thisChecked = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ var theChar=this.name.charAt(8); var checked = this.checked; if (theChar == "A"){ if (this.name == thisName && !thisChecked){ // Yes wasn't checked - is No? if(!checked){ notOK = true; } } thisChecked = checked; thisName = this.name; } }); }else{ // set the input to B $("#type").val("B"); // check _all_ b's are checked var thisName; var thisChecked = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ var theChar=this.name.charAt(8); var checked = this.checked; if (theChar == "B"){ if (this.name == thisName && !thisChecked){ // A wasn't checked - is B? if(!checked){ notOK = true; } } thisChecked = checked; thisName = this.name; } }); } return notOK; } function haveNo(){ var thisName; var notOK = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ var checked = this.checked; if (this.name == thisName){ //Is this checked if(checked){ notOK = true; $("#type").val("C"); } } thisName = this.name; }); return notOK; } This worked well but I'm completely stuck at extending it to include the C series. I now have to check that the user hasn't answered any A and B, A and C and B and C questions. Everything I've tried fails to validate. Here's where I'm at right now with my new script: $(function() { $("#editRecord").submit(function(){ // is anything checked? if(!checkEmpty()){ $("#error").html("Please check something before submitting"); //alert("nothing Checked"); return false; } // Only A or B or C if(isAorBorC()){ $("#error").html("Please complete A or B or C, not both"); //alert("please complete A or B, not both"); return false; }; // all A's or all B's or all C's if(allAorBorCChecked()){ $("#error").html("It appears you have not completed all questions"); //alert("missing data"); return false; }; if(haveNo()){ // we're going on, but sending "type = C" } //alert("all OK"); return true; }); }); function checkEmpty(){ var OK = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ if (this.checked){ OK = true; } }); return OK; } function isAorBorC(){ var OK = false; var Achecked = false; var Bchecked = false; var Cchecked = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ var theChar=this.name.charAt(8); // if we have an A checked remember it if(theChar == "A" && this.checked && !Achecked){ Achecked = true; } if(theChar == "B" && this.checked && !Achecked){ Bchecked = true; } if(theChar == "C" && this.checked && !Achecked){ Cchecked = true; } if(Achecked && theChar == "B" && !Bchecked){ if(this.checked){ Bchecked = true; } } if(Achecked && theChar == "C" && !Cchecked){ if(this.checked){ Cchecked = true; } } if(Bchecked && theChar == "C" && !Cchecked){ if(this.checked){ Cchecked = true; } } if (Achecked && Bchecked){ OK = true; } if (Achecked && CBchecked){ OK = true; } if (Bchecked && Cchecked){ OK = true; } }); return OK; } function allAorBorCChecked(){ var notOK = false; var Achecked = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ // skip through to see if we're doing A's or B's var theChar=this.name.charAt(8); // check the A's if(theChar == "A" && this.checked && !Achecked){ Achecked = true; } }); if(Achecked){ // set the input to A $("#type").val("A"); // check _all_ a's are checked var thisName; var thisChecked = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ var theChar=this.name.charAt(8); var checked = this.checked; if (theChar == "A"){ if (this.name == thisName && !thisChecked){ // Yes wasn't checked - is No? if(!checked){ notOK = true; } } thisChecked = checked; thisName = this.name; } }); }elseif{ // set the input to B $("#type").val("B"); // check _all_ b's are checked var thisName; var thisChecked = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ var theChar=this.name.charAt(8); var checked = this.checked; if (theChar == "B"){ if (this.name == thisName && !thisChecked){ // A wasn't checked - is B? if(!checked){ notOK = true; } } thisChecked = checked; thisName = this.name; } }); } return notOK; } }else{ // set the input to C $("#type").val("C"); // check _all_ c's are checked var thisName; var thisChecked = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ var theChar=this.name.charAt(8); var checked = this.checked; if (theChar == "C"){ if (this.name == thisName && !thisChecked){ // A wasn't checked - is B? if(!checked){ notOK = true; } } thisChecked = checked; thisName = this.name; } }); } return notOK; } function haveNo(){ var thisName; var notOK = false; $(":radio").each(function(){ var checked = this.checked; if (this.name == thisName){ //Is this checked if(checked){ notOK = true; $("#type").val("C"); } } thisName = this.name; }); return notOK; } Anyone see what I'm doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • Benefits of "Don't Fragment" on TCP Packets?

    - by taspeotis
    One of our customers is having trouble submitting data from our application (on their PC) to a server (different geographical location). When sending packets under 1100 bytes everything works fine, but above this we see TCP retransmitting the packet every few seconds and getting no response. The packets we are using for testing are about 1400 bytes (but less than 1472). I can send an ICMP ping to www.google.com that is 1472 bytes and get a response (so it's not their router/first few hops). I found that our application sets the DF flag for these packets, and I believe a router along the way to the server has an MTU less than/equal to 1100 and dropping the packet. This affects 1 client in 5000, but since everybody's routes will be different this is expected. The data is a SOAP envelope and we expect a SOAP response back. I can't justify WHY we do it, the code to do this was written by a previous developer. So... Are there are benefits OR justification to setting the DF flag on TCP packets for application data? I can think of reasons it is needed for network diagnostics applications but not in our situation (we want the data to get to the endpoint, fragmented or not). One of our sysadmins said that it might have something to do with us using SSL, but as far as I know SSL is like a stream and regardless of fragmentation, as long as the stream is rebuilt at the end, there's no problem. If there's no good justification I will be changing the behaviour of our application. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Change URL Submitted to Depending on Form Selection

    - by Chris
    I have a form which I need to submit to one of three different URLs depending on a selection made in the form. I suspect the easiest solution is to use jQuery to insert the appropriate path before the rest of the form parameters as the selection is made, but not sure on what the code would be. Any pointers greratly appreciated! <form id="myForm" action='/booking/default-path' accept-charset='utf-8' method='get'> <select name="paramA" id="paramA"> <option id="optionA" value="A" selected="selected">Option A</option> <option id="optionB" value="B">Option B</option> </select> <select name="currency" id="currency"> <option id="GBP" value="GBP" selected="selected">British Pounds</option> <option id="EUR" value="EUR">Euros</option> <option id="USD" value="USD">US Dollars</option> </select> <input type="submit" value="submit" id="submit" name="submit" /> </form> Where the three different URLs would be: ../booking/default-path-gbp?...[params here]... ../booking/default-path-eur?...[params here]... ../booking/default-path-usd?...[params here]... I know it would be a lot easier to incorporate the parameter in the usual way and just use one submission URL root, but unfortunately I'm submitting to an eComms system out of my control and am stuck with having to find a solution to this. Should be easy I think, but not sure where to start, jQuery used elsewhere, so would prefer to use this framework in any solutions.

    Read the article

  • Wordpress Contact Form 7 in a hidden div.

    - by Luke
    Hi there, I'm using Contact Form 7 on Wordpress. I have it set up so the upload appears in the 3rd of three divs that hide and show depending on a clicked link. Everything is fine except when I click submit it hides the uploads div and shows the first div again. The form is submitting fine and you see a message that it has sent if you navigate back to the uploads section. Is there any way to keep the div you're in open and keep the rest hidden on submit? This is the code i'm using for hiding and showing. I'm sure it's not perfect but it works. // My Files function basic_myfiles($atts, $content = null) { return '' . $content . ''; } add_shortcode("myfiles", "basic_myfiles"); // Sound Library function basic_soundlib($atts, $content = null) { return '' . $content . ''; } add_shortcode("soundlib", "basic_soundlib"); // Uploads function basic_uploads($atts, $content = null) { return '' . $content . do_shortcode( '[contact-form 4 "Client Upload Form"]' ) . ''; } add_shortcode("uploads", "basic_uploads"); Thanks

    Read the article

  • Why "Content-Length: 0" in POST requests?

    - by stesch
    A customer sometimes sends POST requests with Content-Length: 0 when submitting a form (10 to over 40 fields). We tested it with different browsers and from different locations but couldn't reproduce the error. The customer is using Internet Explorer 7 and a proxy. We asked them to let their system administrator see into the problem from their side. Running some tests without the proxy, etc.. In the meantime (half a year later and still no answer) I'm curious if somebody else knows of similar problems with a Content-Length: 0 request. Maybe from inside some Windows network with a special proxy for big companies. Is there a known problem with Internet Explorer 7? With a proxy system? The Windows network itself? Google only showed something in the context of NTLM (and such) authentication, but we aren't using this in the web application. Maybe it's in the way the proxy operates in the customer's network with Windows logins? (I'm no Windows expert. Just guessing.) I have no further information about the infrastructure.

    Read the article

  • Blocking HTML and Javascript from being displayed on my site

    - by Tim Powell
    I am working on this new social networking site. One of it's various functions is posting. You can post to Facebook and my site, or Twitter and my site. That being said, I couldn't help but try and post HTML as I was testing sql injection. When I did, I noticed that there where ways to manipulate the site to, for instance, using a element to completely screw up the CSS design, or redirect a user to another site using javascript. That being said, I want to make my site a safe environment for my users... not a site that is used to distribute computer viruses, porn, and other things that might make someone tend to stay off of my site. When I searched this topic, I found ways to "strip" the HTML out of the $post variable before submitting it to the database. However, I would just like to make it so you can post any text, including HTML and Javascript, without the browser interpreting it as "run this..." code: I want to display it as plane text. I've seen it on Facebook, and when I looked at it the source code of a post, it showed <, /, and as regular text. I tried "dissecting" Facebook's source code, but found nothing. I have tried using tags such as <pre> and <code>, but because of the lack of ability to style and control them, I gave up and went back to just allowing HTML. Please, anyone who knows how to do this, please help me out. Thanks in advance, TP

    Read the article

  • LINQ to SQL - database relationships won't update after submit

    - by Quantic Programming
    I have a Database with the tables Users and Uploads. The important columns are: Users -> UserID Uploads -> UploadID, UserID The primary key in the relationship is Users -> UserID and the foreign key is Uploads -> UserID. In LINQ to SQL, I do the following operations: Retrieve files var upload = new Upload(); upload.UserID = user.UserID; upload.UploadID = XXX; db.Uploads.InsertOnSubmit(upload) db.SubmitChanges(); If I do that and rerun the application (and the db object is re-built, of course) - if do something like this: foreach(var upload in user.Uploads) I get all the uploads with that user's ID. (like added in the previous example) The problem is, that my application, after adding an upload an submitting changes, doesn't update the user.Uploads collection. i.e - I don't get the newly added uploads. The user object is stored in the Session object. At first, I though that the LINQ to SQL Framework doesn't update the reference of the object, therefore I should simply "reset" the user object from a new SQL request. I mean this: Session["user"] = db.Users.Where(u => u.UserID == user.UserID).SingleOrDefault(); (Where user is the previous user) But it didn't help. Please note: After rerunning the application, user.Uploads does have the new upload! Did anyone experience this type of problem, or is it normal behavior? I am a newbie to this framework. I would gladly take any advice. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • How to add or remove a value inside a table cell on selection / de-selection of checkbox of that row, trying to submit the value via Jquery?

    - by Raul
    Here is the table: <%= form_tag '', :id => "costs" do %> <table class="table table-bordered" id="service_cost"> <% @services.each do |service| %> <tbody> <tr> <td><%= check_box_tag :open_service, {}, false, :class => 'checkable' %></td> <td><%= service.phone %></td> <td><%= service.internet %></td> <td></td> <td></td> <td></td> <td></td> <td></td> <td><%= service.house_keeping %> </td> <td>0.0 </td> <td><%= service.laundry %></td> <td><%= text_field_tag "service_cost", service.total, :class => "input-small" %></td> </tr> <% end %> when the form gets submitted, the javascript gets into action: $("#costs").submit(function(){ formData=$("#costs").serializeArray(); processFormData(formData) return false; }); This ensures form submission on selecting the checkbox: $('.checkable').live('change', function() { $(this).parents('form:first').submit(); }); But, what I am looking for is adding or removing a cell value based on checkbox selection/de-selection and submitting it, kindly suggest a way to do it.

    Read the article

  • Periodically iterating over a collection that's constantly changing

    - by rwmnau
    I have a collection of objects that's constantly changing, and I want to display some information about objects (my application is multi-threaded, and differently threads are constantly submitting requests to modify an object in the collection, so it's unpredictable), and I want to display some information about what's currently in the collection. If I lock the collection, I can iterate over it and get my information without any problems - however, this causes problems with the other threads, since they could have submitted multiple requests to modify the collection in the meantime, and will be stalled. I've thought of a couple ways around this, and I'm looking for any advice. Make a copy of the collection and iterate over it, allowing the original to continue updating in the background. The collection can get large, so this isn't ideal, but it's safe. Iterate over it using a For...Next loop, and catch an IndexOutOfBounds exception if an item is removed from the collection while we're iterating. This may occasionally cause duplicates to appear in my snapshot, so it's not ideal either. Any other ideas? I'm only concerned about a moment-in-time snapshot, so I'm not concerned about reflecting changes in my application - my main concern is that the collection be able to be updated with minimal latency, and that updates never be lost.

    Read the article

  • What techniques do you use for emitting data from the server that will solely be used in client side scripts?

    - by chuck
    Hi all, I never found an optimal solution for this problem so I am hoping that some of you out there have a few solutions. Let's say I need to render out a list of checkboxes and each checkbox has a set of additional data that goes with it. This data will be used purely in the context of javascript and jquery. My usual strategy is to render this data in hidden fields that are grouped in the same container as the checkbox. My rendered HTML will look something like this: <div> <input type="checkbox" /> <input type="hidden" class="genreId" /> <input type="hidden" class="titleId" /> </div> My only problem with this is that the data in the hidden fields get posted to the server when the form is submitted. For small amounts of data, this is fine. However, I frequently work with large datasets and a large amount of data is needlessly transferred. UPDATE: Before submitting this post, I just saw that I can add a "DISABLED" attribute to my input element to suppress the submission of data. Is this pretty much the best approach that I can take? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Make form redirect users after posting

    - by Liso22
    I need to change a form so that instead of reloading the page after submitting it, it redirects the user to another page, this is the form: <form class="questionform" name="questionform-0" id="questionform-0"> <textarea class="question-box" cols="12" rows="5" id="question-box-' . $questionformid . '" name="title" type="text" maxlength="200" size="28"></textarea> <input type="text" class="ubicacion" value="" name="question"> <input type="button" name="ask" value="Publicar" onclick="askquestion('questionform-0'); window.location.reload(true);"> I want to remove the window.location.reload and change it for a redirect that sends users to the page their comment will appear. Which is: www.chusmix.com/s?= (the content of the second field) The problem is that the content of the second field is part of the url I want to redirect, it's not simply always the same URL. So I have no idea how to do it. How do I do it? Anyway thanks for any info or whatever that points me on the right direction. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Fatal error: Call to a member function escape() on a non-object in .....on line 10

    - by danyo
    i am making a simple javascript login form for wordpress. i have the form submitting to the following bit of php to handle the login: <?php get_header(); global $user_ID; if (!$user_ID) { if($_POST){ //We shall SQL escape all inputs $username = $wpdb->escape($_REQUEST['username']); $password = $wpdb->escape($_REQUEST['password']); $remember = $wpdb->escape($_REQUEST['rememberme']); if($remember) $remember = "true"; else $remember = "false"; $login_data = array(); $login_data['user_login'] = $username; $login_data['user_password'] = $password; $login_data['remember'] = $remember; $user_verify = wp_signon( $login_data, false ); //wp_signon is a wordpress function which authenticates a user. It accepts user info parameters as an array. if ( is_wp_error($user_verify) ) { echo "<span class='error'>Invalid username or password. Please try again!</span>"; exit(); } else { echo "<script type='text/javascript'>window.location='". get_bloginfo('url') ."'</script>"; exit(); } } else { //get_header(); ?> any ideas on why i am getting the error? Cheers, Dan

    Read the article

  • This process does not work in JavaScript: createElement() -> setAttribute('id') -> getElementById()

    - by kristovaher
    I was so sure that this question has been answered a thousand times before, but I've been unable to find an answer in StackOverflow. If there is already an answer and I was unable to find it then I apologize. I create hidden form elements dynamically like this: submitForm=document.getElementById('my-form'); var element=document.createElement('input'); element.id='hidden-form-data'; // or setAttribute('id','hidden-form-data'); element.name='my-hidden-form-data'; element.type='hidden'; element.value='my-data'; submitForm.appendChild(element); This works and the input field is created and it is taken into account when submitting the form. But I want to remove it after I have dynamically created it. I was sure that creating a new node this way would be 'correct' for browser and DOM, but apparently it is not. This returns null: element=document.getElementById('hidden-form-data'); if(element!=null){ element.parentNode.removeChild(element); } But it never gets removed and is always null. Is there any way I can remove a dynamically created node with an ID? Thank you! Please do not suggest jQuery, it's not possible to use jQuery for this, footprint is too heavy for such a small task I could not get a working answer from here, which was the closest thread I could find.

    Read the article

  • Jquery Form Validation Plugin Not Working

    - by nayanjyoti hazarika
    I try to validate a simple Form but the Jquery Validation Plugin not working when I use only Button not The Submit Button. I can not use the Submit button there Because If I use submit Button After Submitting the form It take the Action and goes to Default page while my current form is comes from Ajax. I am very new to Jquery. Please Help its Urgent... I am giving the files here. index.html <html> <head> <script src="jquery.js"> <script="jquery-validate-min.js"> <script="validation.js> </head> <body> <form id="contact_form"> <table> <tr><th>Name</th><td><input name="name" /></td></tr> <tr><th>E Mail</th><td><input name="email" /></td></tr> <tr><th><input type="button" name ="submit" id="form_sub" onclick="save"></th><td><input name="email" /></td></tr> </table> </form> </body> </html> Now the validation.js file function save(){ $("#form_sub").click(function(){ $("#contact_form").validate({ 'rules':{ 'name':{ 'required':true, 'minlength':5 }, 'email':{ 'required':true, 'email':true } } }) } Everything works fine when we use input type="submit"... But it not working when we use input type="button" Any Idea how can Fix this? I am new to Jquery ... Please Help

    Read the article

  • How to submit to the server with JQuery.UI Dialog and ASP.Net?

    - by Paul
    Hi, I'm looking for a way to submit information captured in a JQuery Dialog to the server in ASP.Net. I originally thought it would work with a 'hidden' asp button, but the click doesn't seem to be submitting the form. Here's the code I have so far: <script type="text/javascript"> jQuery(document).ready(function() { var dlg = jQuery("#dialog").dialog({ bgiframe: true, autoOpen: false, height: 150, width: 300, modal: true, buttons: { "Add": function() { var btn = document.getElementById("<%=btnAdd.ClientID %>"); if (btn) btn.click(); $(this).dialog("close"); } } }); $("#dialog").parent().appendTo("#dialog_target"); }); </script> <div id="hidden" style="visibility:hidden" > <!-- Hidden button that actually triggers server add --> <asp:Button ID="btnAdd" runat="server" style="display:none" OnClick="btnAdd_Click" /> <!-- Hidden Delete Dialog --> <div id="dialog" title="New Additional Skill"> <label>Additional Skill Name:</label> <asp:TextBox ID="_txtNewSkillName" runat="server" /> </div> Any pointers?

    Read the article

  • Passing XML data and user from coldfusion page to .NET page

    - by Mark Rullo
    I'd appreciate some input on this situation, I can't figure out the best way to do this. I have some data that's being prepared for me in a ColdFusion app and in an IFrame within the CF app we want to display some graphs (not strictly an image, it's an entire page) being generated on the .NET side of things. I'd like to pass XML data from the CF side to .NET as well as the user. On the .NET side I'm putting the data in a session so the user can sift through it without the need to have it re-queried and re-passed from CF. What I've tried: Generating XML with CF, putting it in a hidden form field, auto-submitting (with JS) a the form to the .NET side. The issue I'm having with this approach is the encoding being done on the form post. The data has entries like <entry data="hello &amp; goodbye">. It's an issue because it's being URL encdeded, Posted, and when I get it on the .NET side I get <entry data="hello & goodbye"> which isn't properly formed XML. What I'd like to avoid: An intermediary DB approach (dropping the data in a DB on CF, picking it up with .NET) I'd like to only display what is passed to the page. I have security concerns with the data, it's very sensitive. Passing the data to a webservice, returning a GUID, forwarding the user with a URL Parameter to access the passed in data. I think that'd be risky if someone happened on a link to that data. I can't take that risk. I was thinking of passing the data with JSON, but I'm very unfamiliar with it. Thoughts? Thanks for your time folks.

    Read the article

  • Rails dealing with blank params at controller level

    - by stephenmurdoch
    I have a User model: class User < ActiveRecord::Base has_secure_password # validation lets users update accounts without entering password validates :password, presence: { on: :create }, allow_blank: { on: :update } validates :password_confirmation, presence: { if: :password_digest_changed? } end I also have a password_reset_controller: def update # this is emailed to the user by the create action - not shown @user=User.find_by_password_reset_token!(params[:id]) if @user.update_attributes(params[:user]) # user is signed in if password and confirmation pass validations sign_in @user redirect_to root_url, :notice => "Password has been reset." else flash.now[:error] = "Something went wrong, please try again." render :edit end end Can you see the problem here? A user can submit a blank a password/confirmation and rails will sign them in, because the User model allows blank on update. It's not a security concern, since an attacker would still need access to a user's email account before they could get anywhere near this action, but my problem is that a user submitting 6 blank chars would be signed in, and their password would not be changed for them, which could lead to confusion later on. So, I've come up with the following solution, and I'd like to check if there's a better way of doing it, before I push to production: def update @user=User.find_by_password_reset_token!(params[:id]) # if user submits blank password, add an error, and render edit action if params[:user][:password].blank? @user.errors.add(:password_digest, "can't be blank.") render :edit elsif @user.update_attributes(params[:user]) sign_in @user redirect_to root_url, :notice => "Password has been reset." else flash.now[:error] = "Something went wrong, please try again." render :edit end end Should I be checking for nil as well as blank? Are there any rails patterns or idiomatic ruby techniques for solving this? [Fwiw, I've got required: true on the html inputs, but want this handled server side too.]

    Read the article

  • Email server; Is this method spam-safe?

    - by Camran
    I have a classifieds website, and on each classified there is a tip-form where users may tip a friend about the classified. The tip-forms' action is set to a php-page, which mails the email after sanitizing etc... I have to filter away spam etc so that my email-server don't get blacklisted or anything... I have my own server (VPS, Linux) and have thought about a solution... How does this sound to you: 1- Install a mail-server 2- Configure Firewall to ONLY allow connections to the mail-server from my website 3- Configure the mail-server so that a maximum of 'x' emails may be sent every 5 minutes or so 4- Create a php filter before sending the mail, which checks for 'bad' words. 5- If necessary, as last resort, ask the user a question (ex 5+5) before submitting form I would rather preferr if I didn't have to implement the 5th implementation above... What do you think? Also, another q I have that you may answer is: If an email-server gets blacklisted, is there any way to un-blacklist it? Or whats the solution if this happens? Thanks

    Read the article

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