Search Results

Search found 9516 results on 381 pages for 'devexpress mvc'.

Page 32/381 | < Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >

  • In Asp.Net MVC 2 is there a better way to return 401 status codes without getting an auth redirect

    - by Greg Roberts
    I have a portion of my site that has a lightweight xml/json REST API. Most of my site is behind forms auth but only some of my API actions require authentication. I have a custom AuthorizeAttribute for my API that I use to check for certain permissions and when it fails it results in a 401. All is good, except since I'm using forms auth, Asp.net conveniently converts that into a 302 redirect to my login page. I've seen some previous questions that seem a bit hackish to either return a 403 instead or to put some logic in the global.asax protected void Application_EndRequest() that will essentially convert 302 to 401 where it meets whatever criteria. Previous Question Previous Question 2 What I'm doing now is sort of like one of the questions, but instead of checking the Application_EndRequest() for a 302 I make my authorize attribute return 666 which indicates to me that I need to set this to a 401. Here is my code: protected void Application_EndRequest() { if (Context.Response.StatusCode == MyAuthAttribute.AUTHORIZATION_FAILED_STATUS) { //check for 666 - status code of hidden 401 Context.Response.StatusCode = 401; } } Even though this works, my question is there something in Asp.net MVC 2 that would prevent me from having to do this? Or, in general is there a better way? I would think this would come up a lot for anyone doing REST api's or just people that do ajax requests in their controllers. The last thing you want is to do a request and get the content of a login page instead of json.

    Read the article

  • How to use NInject (or other DI / IoC container) with the model binder in ASP.NET MVC 2 ?

    - by Andrei Rinea
    Let's say I have an User entity and I would want to set it's CreationTime property in the constructor to DateTime.Now. But being a unit test adopter I don't want to access DateTime.Now directly but use an ITimeProvider : public class User { public User(ITimeProvider timeProvider) { // ... this.CreationTime = timeProvider.Now; } // ..... } public interface ITimeProvider { public DateTime Now { get; } } public class TimeProvider : ITimeProvider { public DateTime Now { get { return DateTime.Now; } } } I am using NInject 2 in my ASP.NET MVC 2.0 application. I have a UserController and two Create methods (one for GET and one for POST). The one for GET is straight forward but the one for POST is not so straight and not so forward :P because I need to mess with the model binder to tell it to get a reference of an implementation of ITimeProvider in order to be able to construct an user instance. public class UserController : Controller { [HttpGet] public ViewResult Create() { return View(); } [HttpPost] public ActionResult Create(User user) { // ... } } I would also like to be able to keep all the features of the default model binder. Any chance to solve this simple/elegant/etc? :D

    Read the article

  • How to secure Add child record functionality in MVC on Parent's view?

    - by RSolberg
    I'm trying to avoid some potential security issues as I expose some a new set of functionality into the real world. This is basically functionality that will allow for a new comment to be added via a partialview on the "Parent" page. My comment needs to know a couple of things, first what record is the comment for and secondly who is making the comment. I really don't like using a hidden field to store the ID for the Parent record in the add comment form as that can be easily changed with some DOM mods. How should I handle this? PARENT <% Html.RenderPartial("AddComment", Model.Comments); %> CHILD <%@ Control Language="C#" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewUserControl<CommentsViewModel>" %> <% using (Html.BeginForm("AddComment", "Requests")) {%> <fieldset> <legend>New Comment</legend> <%= Html.HiddenFor(p => p.RequestID) %> <%= Html.TextBoxFor(p => p.Text) %> &nbsp; <input type="submit" value="Add" /> </fieldset> <% } %> CONTROLLER [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] public void AddComment(CommentsViewModel commentsModel) { var user = GetCurrentUser(); commentsModel.CreatedByID = user.UserID; RequestsService.AddComment(commentsModel); }

    Read the article

  • Unit Testing (xUnit) an ASP.NET Mvc Controller with a custom input model?

    - by Danny Douglass
    I'm having a hard time finding information on what I expect to be a pretty straightforward scenario. I'm trying to unit test an Action on my ASP.NET Mvc 2 Controller that utilizes a custom input model w/ DataAnnotions. My testing framework is xUnit, as mentioned in the title. Here is my custom Input Model: public class EnterPasswordInputModel { [Required(ErrorMessage = "")] public string Username { get; set; } [Required(ErrorMessage = "Password is a required field.")] public string Password { get; set; } } And here is my Controller (took out some logic to simplify for this ex.): [HttpPost] public ActionResult EnterPassword(EnterPasswordInputModel enterPasswordInput) { if (!ModelState.IsValid) return View(); // do some logic to validate input // if valid - next View on successful validation return View("NextViewName"); // else - add and display error on current view return View(); } And here is my xUnit Fact (also simplified): [Fact] public void EnterPassword_WithValidInput_ReturnsNextView() { // Arrange var controller = CreateLoginController(userService.Object); // Act var result = controller.EnterPassword( new EnterPasswordInputModel { Username = username, Password = password }) as ViewResult; // Assert Assert.Equal("NextViewName", result.ViewName); } When I run my test I get the following error on my test fact when trying to retrieve the controller result (Act section): System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an object. Thanks in advance for any help you can offer!

    Read the article

  • How can I create a horizontal table in a single foreach loop in MVC?

    - by GenericTypeTea
    Is there any way, in ASP.Net MVC, to condense the following code to a single foreach loop? <table class="table"> <tr> <td> Name </td> <% foreach (var item in Model) { %> <td> <%= item.Name %> </td> <% } %> </tr> <tr> <td> Item </td> <% foreach (var item in Model) { %> <td> <%= item.Company %> </td> <% } %> </tr> </table> Where model is a simple object: public class SomeObject { public virtual Name {get;set;} public virtual Company {get;set;} } This would output a table as follows: Name | Bob | Sam | Bill | Steve | Company | Builder | Fireman | MS | Apple | I know I could probably use an extension method to write out each row, but is it possible to build all rows using a single iteration over the model? This is a follow on from this question as I'm unhappy with my accepted answer and cannot believe I've provided the best solution.

    Read the article

  • Asp MVC - "The Id field is required" validation message on Create; Id not set to [Required]

    - by burnt_hand
    This is happening when I try to create the entity using a Create style action in Asp.Net MVC 2. The POCO has the following properties: public int Id {get;set;} [Required] public string Message {get; set} On the creation of the entity, the Id is set automatically, so there is no need for it on the Create action. The ModelState says that "The Id field is required", but I haven't set that to be so. Is there something automatic going on here? EDIT - Reason Revealed The reason for the issue is answered by Brad Wilson via Paul Speranza in one of the comments below where he says (cheers Paul): You're providing a value for ID, you just didn't know you were. It's in the route data of the default route ("{controller}/{action}/{id}"), and its default value is the empty string, which isn't valid for an int. Use the [Bind] attribute on your action parameter to exclude ID. My default route was: new { controller = "Customer", action = "Edit", id = " " } // Parameter defaults EDIT - Update Model technique I actually changed the way I did this again by using TryUpdateModel and the exclude parameter array asscoiated with that. [HttpPost] public ActionResult Add(Venue collection) { Venue venue = new Venue(); if (TryUpdateModel(venue, null, null, new[] { "Id" })) { _service.Add(venue); return RedirectToAction("Index", "Manage"); } return View(collection); }

    Read the article

  • Asp MVC - "The Id field is required" validation message on Create; Id not set to [Required]

    - by Dann
    This is happening when I try to create the entity using a Create style action in Asp.Net MVC 2. The POCO has the following properties: public int Id {get;set;} [Required] public string Message {get; set} On the creation of the entity, the Id is set automatically, so there is no need for it on the Create action. The ModelState says that "The Id field is required", but I haven't set that to be so. Is there something automatic going on here? EDIT - Reason Revealed The reason for the issue is answered by Brad Wilson via Paul Speranza in one of the comments below where he says (cheers Paul): You're providing a value for ID, you just didn't know you were. It's in the route data of the default route ("{controller}/{action}/{id}"), and its default value is the empty string, which isn't valid for an int. Use the [Bind] attribute on your action parameter to exclude ID. My default route was: new { controller = "Customer", action = "Edit", id = " " } // Parameter defaults EDIT - Update Model technique I actually changed the way I did this again by using TryUpdateModel and the exclude parameter array asscoiated with that. [HttpPost] public ActionResult Add(Venue collection) { Venue venue = new Venue(); if (TryUpdateModel(venue, null, null, new[] { "Id" })) { _service.Add(venue); return RedirectToAction("Index", "Manage"); } return View(collection); }

    Read the article

  • How would you organize this in asp.net mvc?

    - by chobo
    I have an asp.net mvc 2.0 application that contains Areas/Modules like calendar, admin, etc... There may be cases where more than one area needs to access the same Repo, so I am not sure where to put the Data Access Layers and Repositories. First Option: Should I create Data Access Layer files (Linq to SQL in my case) with their accompanying Repositories for each area, so each area only contains the Tables, and Repositories needed by those areas. The benefit is that everything needed to run that module is one place, so it is more encapsulated (in my mind anyway). The downside is that I may have duplicate queries, because other modules may use the same query. Second Option Or, would it be better to place the DAL and Repositories outside the Area's and treat them as Global? The advantage is I won't have any duplicate queries, but I may be loading a lot of unnecessary queries and DAL tables up for certain modules. It is also more work to reuse or modify these modules for future projects (though the chance of reusing them is slim to none :)) Which option makes more sense? If someone has a better way I'd love to hear it. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • my asp.net mvc 2.0 application fails with error "No parameterless constructor defined for this objec

    - by loviji
    Hello, i'm new in asp.net mvc 2. I'm trying to list all data from one table(ms sql server table). as ORM I use Entity Framework. now, I'm tried to write something to do this: Model: private uqsEntities _uqsEntity; public permissionRepository(uqsEntities uqsEntity) { _uqsEntity = uqsEntity; } public IEnumerable<userPermissions> getAllData() { return _uqsEntity.userPermissions; } controller: private DataManager _dataManager; public ManagePermissionsController(DataManager datamanager) { _dataManager = datamanager; } public ActionResult Index() { return RedirectToAction("List"); } [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Get)] public ActionResult List() { return List(null); } [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] public ActionResult List(int? userID) { return View(_dataManager.Permission.getAllData().ToList()); } Route: routes.MapRoute( "ManagePerm", // Route name "{controller}/{action}/{id}", // URL with parameters new { controller = "ManagePermissions", action = "Index"}, new string[] { "uqs.Controllers" } // Parameter defaults ); and View automatically generated by Visual Studio(in action mouse right-click). when I run app. , my app. fails. No parameterless constructor defined for this object. Description: An unhandled exception occurred during the execution of the current web request. Please review the stack trace for more information about the error and where it originated in the code. Exception Details: System.MissingMethodException: No parameterless constructor defined for this object. Source Error: An unhandled exception was generated during the execution of the current web request. Information regarding the origin and location of the exception can be identified using the exception stack trace below. Stack Trace: [MissingMethodException: No parameterless constructor defined for this object.] System.RuntimeTypeHandle.CreateInstance(RuntimeType type, Boolean publicOnly, Boolean noCheck, Boolean& canBeCached, RuntimeMethodHandle& ctor, Boolean& bNeedSecurityCheck) +0 System.RuntimeType.CreateInstanceSlow(Boolean publicOnly, Boolean fillCache) +86 System.RuntimeType.CreateInstanceImpl(Boolean publicOnly, Boolean skipVisibilityChecks, Boolean fillCache) +230 System.Activator.CreateInstance(Type type, Boolean nonPublic) +67 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultControllerFactory.GetControllerInstance(RequestContext requestContext, Type controllerType) +80 [InvalidOperationException: An error occurred when trying to create a controller of type 'uqs.Controllers.ManagePermissionsController'. Make sure that the controller has a parameterless public constructor.] System.Web.Mvc.DefaultControllerFactory.GetControllerInstance(RequestContext requestContext, Type controllerType) +190 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultControllerFactory.CreateController(RequestContext requestContext, String controllerName) +68 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.ProcessRequestInit(HttpContextBase httpContext, IController& controller, IControllerFactory& factory) +118 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.BeginProcessRequest(HttpContextBase httpContext, AsyncCallback callback, Object state) +46 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.BeginProcessRequest(HttpContext httpContext, AsyncCallback callback, Object state) +63 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.System.Web.IHttpAsyncHandler.BeginProcessRequest(HttpContext context, AsyncCallback cb, Object extraData) +13 System.Web.CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication.IExecutionStep.Execute() +8679186 System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously) +155 please, somebody, help me to catch problem.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC Best Practices, Tips and Tricks

    - by Koistya Navin
    Please, share your ideas which could serve as best practices or guidelines for creating ASP.NET MVC web applications. These ideas and/or coding samples should be relevant to ASP.NET MVC application creation itself and not to TDD or similar practices. Other resources: ASP.NET MVC Best Practices (Part 1) by Kazi Manzur Rashid ASP.NET MVC Best Practices (Part 2) by Kazi Manzur Rashid

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET WebForms vs MVC [after VS2010/.NET 4.0 announcement]

    - by fjxx
    Two of the biggest advantages of MVC over webforms were non-existent viewstate and URL routing. VS2010 and .NET 4.0 incorporates built-in URL routing for Webforms as well as better control for viewstate. I advocate use of MVC for extranet sites due to the MVC design pattern and its general lightweight nature but in light of this new announcement has Webforms closed the gap? Why would you still pick MVC over Webforms? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Will there be any problem if i inherit aspx page from System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage

    - by Vinni
    I am developing a website which will be having both asp.net pages and MVC pages in it, So I have BaseWebPage class which will be used for both asp.net pages and MVC Views. but My BaseWebPage class is inherited from System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage, So Will there be any code/ functionality break for normal asp.net pages, because System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage is overriding some of the Pagelife cycle methods.

    Read the article

  • ASP.Net MVC View within WebForms Application

    - by Neil
    I am adding functionality to an ASP.Net webforms application and we've decided that new development will be done MVC with a view to move all functionality over eventually. Obviously, MVC and WebForms play together rather nicely when it comes to accessing an MVC action via a URL. However, I'd like to display the MVC view within an existing tab (telerik) control on a WebForm page. This view will be using js/css file so that will need to be considered also.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC & Web Services

    - by ANaimi
    Hello, Does adding a Web Service to my ASP.NET MVC project break the whole concept of MVC? That Web Service (WCF) depends on the Model layer from my MVC project to communicate with the back-end (so it looks to me like it needs to be part of the MVC solution). Should I add this to the Controller or Model layer?

    Read the article

  • asp.net mvc 2 method not found

    - by Debra
    When I run my asp.net mvc 2 site (shared hosting) I get the following error: Method not found: 'Void System.Web.Mvc.DataAnnotationsModelValidatorProvider.set_AddImplicitRequiredAttributeForValueTypes(Boolean)'. In the bin directory I have System.Web.Mvc.dll version 2.0.50217.0 On my local dev machine it runs fine. Is it possible that if the hosting provider has a different mvc 2 version installed it would cause this error? Thank you!

    Read the article

  • Best List view solution for asp.net mvc?

    - by sebastian_h
    Its common to observe listview developments for webforms but no common in mvc. on the other hand for mvc I´m only finding grid views displaying tabular data. In your opinion which is the best List view solution for asp.net mvc?. Edited: ok, finally I found a possibility. Kazi Manzur wrote a listview using telerik controls. http://weblogs.asp.net/rashid/archive/2010/03/24/creating-rich-view-components-in-asp-net-mvc.aspx

    Read the article

  • How can I highlight empty fields in ASP.NET MVC 2 before model binding has occurred?

    - by Richard Poole
    I'm trying to highlight certain form fields (let's call them important fields) when they're empty. In essence, they should behave a bit like required fields, but they should be highlighted if they are empty when the user first GETs the form, before POST & model validation has occurred. The user can also ignore the warnings and submit the form when these fields are empty (i.e. empty important fields won't cause ModelState.IsValid to be false). Ideally it needs to work server-side (empty important fields are highlighted with warning message on GET) and client-side (highlighted if empty when losing focus). I've thought of a few ways of doing this, but I'm hoping some bright spark can come up with a nice elegant solution... Just use a CSS class to flag important fields Update every view/template to render important fields with an important CSS class. Write some jQuery to highlight empty important fields when the DOM is ready and hook their blur events so highlights & warning messages can be shown/hidden as appropriate. Pros: Quick and easy. Cons: Unnecessary duplication of importance flags and warning messages across views & templates. Clients with JavaScript disabled will never see highlights/warnings. Custom data annotation and client-side validator Create classes similar to RequiredAttribute, RequiredAttributeAdapter and ModelClientValidationRequiredRule, and register the adapter with DataAnnotationsModelValidatorProvider.RegisterAdapter. Create a client-side validator like this that responds to the blur event. Pros: Data annotation follows DRY principle (Html.ValidationMessageFor<T> picks up field importance and warning message from attribute, no duplication). Cons: Must call TryValidateModel from GET actions to ensure empty fields are decorated. Not technically validation (client- & server-side rules don't match) so it's at the mercy of framework changes. Clients with JavaScript disabled will never see highlights/warnings. Clone the entire validation framework It strikes me that I'm trying to achieve exactly the same thing as validation but with warnings rather than errors. It needs to run before model binding (and therefore validation) has occurred. Perhaps it's worth designing a similar framework with annotations like Required, RegularExpression, StringLength, etc. that somehow cause Html.TextBoxFor<T> etc. to render the warning CSS class and Html.ValidationMessageFor<T> to emit the warning message and JSON needed to enable client-side blur checks. Pros: Sounds like something MVC 2 could do with out of the box. Cons: Way too much effort for my current requirement! I'm swaying towards option 1. Can anyone think of a better solution?

    Read the article

  • Top things web developers should know about the Visual Studio 2013 release

    - by Jon Galloway
    ASP.NET and Web Tools for Visual Studio 2013 Release NotesASP.NET and Web Tools for Visual Studio 2013 Release NotesSummary for lazy readers: Visual Studio 2013 is now available for download on the Visual Studio site and on MSDN subscriber downloads) Visual Studio 2013 installs side by side with Visual Studio 2012 and supports round-tripping between Visual Studio versions, so you can try it out without committing to a switch Visual Studio 2013 ships with the new version of ASP.NET, which includes ASP.NET MVC 5, ASP.NET Web API 2, Razor 3, Entity Framework 6 and SignalR 2.0 The new releases ASP.NET focuses on One ASP.NET, so core features and web tools work the same across the platform (e.g. adding ASP.NET MVC controllers to a Web Forms application) New core features include new templates based on Bootstrap, a new scaffolding system, and a new identity system Visual Studio 2013 is an incredible editor for web files, including HTML, CSS, JavaScript, Markdown, LESS, Coffeescript, Handlebars, Angular, Ember, Knockdown, etc. Top links: Visual Studio 2013 content on the ASP.NET site are in the standard new releases area: http://www.asp.net/vnext ASP.NET and Web Tools for Visual Studio 2013 Release Notes Short intro videos on the new Visual Studio web editor features from Scott Hanselman and Mads Kristensen Announcing release of ASP.NET and Web Tools for Visual Studio 2013 post on the official .NET Web Development and Tools Blog Scott Guthrie's post: Announcing the Release of Visual Studio 2013 and Great Improvements to ASP.NET and Entity Framework Okay, for those of you who are still with me, let's dig in a bit. Quick web dev notes on downloading and installing Visual Studio 2013 I found Visual Studio 2013 to be a pretty fast install. According to Brian Harry's release post, installing over pre-release versions of Visual Studio is supported.  I've installed the release version over pre-release versions, and it worked fine. If you're only going to be doing web development, you can speed up the install if you just select Web Developer tools. Of course, as a good Microsoft employee, I'll mention that you might also want to install some of those other features, like the Store apps for Windows 8 and the Windows Phone 8.0 SDK, but they do download and install a lot of other stuff (e.g. the Windows Phone SDK sets up Hyper-V and downloads several GB's of VM's). So if you're planning just to do web development for now, you can pick just the Web Developer Tools and install the other stuff later. If you've got a fast internet connection, I recommend using the web installer instead of downloading the ISO. The ISO includes all the features, whereas the web installer just downloads what you're installing. Visual Studio 2013 development settings and color theme When you start up Visual Studio, it'll prompt you to pick some defaults. These are totally up to you -whatever suits your development style - and you can change them later. As I said, these are completely up to you. I recommend either the Web Development or Web Development (Code Only) settings. The only real difference is that Code Only hides the toolbars, and you can switch between them using Tools / Import and Export Settings / Reset. Web Development settings Web Development (code only) settings Usually I've just gone with Web Development (code only) in the past because I just want to focus on the code, although the Standard toolbar does make it easier to switch default web browsers. More on that later. Color theme Sigh. Okay, everyone's got their favorite colors. I alternate between Light and Dark depending on my mood, and I personally like how the low contrast on the window chrome in those themes puts the emphasis on my code rather than the tabs and toolbars. I know some people got pretty worked up over that, though, and wanted the blue theme back. I personally don't like it - it reminds me of ancient versions of Visual Studio that I don't want to think about anymore. So here's the thing: if you install Visual Studio Ultimate, it defaults to Blue. The other versions default to Light. If you use Blue, I won't criticize you - out loud, that is. You can change themes really easily - either Tools / Options / Environment / General, or the smart way: ctrl+q for quick launch, then type Theme and hit enter. Signing in During the first run, you'll be prompted to sign in. You don't have to - you can click the "Not now, maybe later" link at the bottom of that dialog. I recommend signing in, though. It's not hooked in with licensing or tracking the kind of code you write to sell you components. It is doing good things, like  syncing your Visual Studio settings between computers. More about that here. So, you don't have to, but I sure do. Overview of shiny new things in ASP.NET land There are a lot of good new things in ASP.NET. I'll list some of my favorite here, but you can read more on the ASP.NET site. One ASP.NET You've heard us talk about this for a while. The idea is that options are good, but choice can be a burden. When you start a new ASP.NET project, why should you have to make a tough decision - with long-term consequences - about how your application will work? If you want to use ASP.NET Web Forms, but have the option of adding in ASP.NET MVC later, why should that be hard? It's all ASP.NET, right? Ideally, you'd just decide that you want to use ASP.NET to build sites and services, and you could use the appropriate tools (the green blocks below) as you needed them. So, here it is. When you create a new ASP.NET application, you just create an ASP.NET application. Next, you can pick from some templates to get you started... but these are different. They're not "painful decision" templates, they're just some starting pieces. And, most importantly, you can mix and match. I can pick a "mostly" Web Forms template, but include MVC and Web API folders and core references. If you've tried to mix and match in the past, you're probably aware that it was possible, but not pleasant. ASP.NET MVC project files contained special project type GUIDs, so you'd only get controller scaffolding support in a Web Forms project if you manually edited the csproj file. Features in one stack didn't work in others. Project templates were painful choices. That's no longer the case. Hooray! I just did a demo in a presentation last week where I created a new Web Forms + MVC + Web API site, built a model, scaffolded MVC and Web API controllers with EF Code First, add data in the MVC view, viewed it in Web API, then added a GridView to the Web Forms Default.aspx page and bound it to the Model. In about 5 minutes. Sure, it's a simple example, but it's great to be able to share code and features across the whole ASP.NET family. Authentication In the past, authentication was built into the templates. So, for instance, there was an ASP.NET MVC 4 Intranet Project template which created a new ASP.NET MVC 4 application that was preconfigured for Windows Authentication. All of that authentication stuff was built into each template, so they varied between the stacks, and you couldn't reuse them. You didn't see a lot of changes to the authentication options, since they required big changes to a bunch of project templates. Now, the new project dialog includes a common authentication experience. When you hit the Change Authentication button, you get some common options that work the same way regardless of the template or reference settings you've made. These options work on all ASP.NET frameworks, and all hosting environments (IIS, IIS Express, or OWIN for self-host) The default is Individual User Accounts: This is the standard "create a local account, using username / password or OAuth" thing; however, it's all built on the new Identity system. More on that in a second. The one setting that has some configuration to it is Organizational Accounts, which lets you configure authentication using Active Directory, Windows Azure Active Directory, or Office 365. Identity There's a new identity system. We've taken the best parts of the previous ASP.NET Membership and Simple Identity systems, rolled in a lot of feedback and made big enhancements to support important developer concerns like unit testing and extensiblity. I've written long posts about ASP.NET identity, and I'll do it again. Soon. This is not that post. The short version is that I think we've finally got just the right Identity system. Some of my favorite features: There are simple, sensible defaults that work well - you can File / New / Run / Register / Login, and everything works. It supports standard username / password as well as external authentication (OAuth, etc.). It's easy to customize without having to re-implement an entire provider. It's built using pluggable pieces, rather than one large monolithic system. It's built using interfaces like IUser and IRole that allow for unit testing, dependency injection, etc. You can easily add user profile data (e.g. URL, twitter handle, birthday). You just add properties to your ApplicationUser model and they'll automatically be persisted. Complete control over how the identity data is persisted. By default, everything works with Entity Framework Code First, but it's built to support changes from small (modify the schema) to big (use another ORM, store your data in a document database or in the cloud or in XML or in the EXIF data of your desktop background or whatever). It's configured via OWIN. More on OWIN and Katana later, but the fact that it's built using OWIN means it's portable. You can find out more in the Authentication and Identity section of the ASP.NET site (and lots more content will be going up there soon). New Bootstrap based project templates The new project templates are built using Bootstrap 3. Bootstrap (formerly Twitter Bootstrap) is a front-end framework that brings a lot of nice benefits: It's responsive, so your projects will automatically scale to device width using CSS media queries. For example, menus are full size on a desktop browser, but on narrower screens you automatically get a mobile-friendly menu. The built-in Bootstrap styles make your standard page elements (headers, footers, buttons, form inputs, tables etc.) look nice and modern. Bootstrap is themeable, so you can reskin your whole site by dropping in a new Bootstrap theme. Since Bootstrap is pretty popular across the web development community, this gives you a large and rapidly growing variety of templates (free and paid) to choose from. Bootstrap also includes a lot of very useful things: components (like progress bars and badges), useful glyphicons, and some jQuery plugins for tooltips, dropdowns, carousels, etc.). Here's a look at how the responsive part works. When the page is full screen, the menu and header are optimized for a wide screen display: When I shrink the page down (this is all based on page width, not useragent sniffing) the menu turns into a nice mobile-friendly dropdown: For a quick example, I grabbed a new free theme off bootswatch.com. For simple themes, you just need to download the boostrap.css file and replace the /content/bootstrap.css file in your project. Now when I refresh the page, I've got a new theme: Scaffolding The big change in scaffolding is that it's one system that works across ASP.NET. You can create a new Empty Web project or Web Forms project and you'll get the Scaffold context menus. For release, we've got MVC 5 and Web API 2 controllers. We had a preview of Web Forms scaffolding in the preview releases, but they weren't fully baked for RTM. Look for them in a future update, expected pretty soon. This scaffolding system wasn't just changed to work across the ASP.NET frameworks, it's also built to enable future extensibility. That's not in this release, but should also hopefully be out soon. Project Readme page This is a small thing, but I really like it. When you create a new project, you get a Project_Readme.html page that's added to the root of your project and opens in the Visual Studio built-in browser. I love it. A long time ago, when you created a new project we just dumped it on you and left you scratching your head about what to do next. Not ideal. Then we started adding a bunch of Getting Started information to the new project templates. That told you what to do next, but you had to delete all of that stuff out of your website. It doesn't belong there. Not ideal. This is a simple HTML file that's not integrated into your project code at all. You can delete it if you want. But, it shows a lot of helpful links that are current for the project you just created. In the future, if we add new wacky project types, they can create readme docs with specific information on how to do appropriately wacky things. Side note: I really like that they used the internal browser in Visual Studio to show this content rather than popping open an HTML page in the default browser. I hate that. It's annoying. If you're doing that, I hope you'll stop. What if some unnamed person has 40 or 90 tabs saved in their browser session? When you pop open your "Thanks for installing my Visual Studio extension!" page, all eleventy billion tabs start up and I wish I'd never installed your thing. Be like these guys and pop stuff Visual Studio specific HTML docs in the Visual Studio browser. ASP.NET MVC 5 The biggest change with ASP.NET MVC 5 is that it's no longer a separate project type. It integrates well with the rest of ASP.NET. In addition to that and the other common features we've already looked at (Bootstrap templates, Identity, authentication), here's what's new for ASP.NET MVC. Attribute routing ASP.NET MVC now supports attribute routing, thanks to a contribution by Tim McCall, the author of http://attributerouting.net. With attribute routing you can specify your routes by annotating your actions and controllers. This supports some pretty complex, customized routing scenarios, and it allows you to keep your route information right with your controller actions if you'd like. Here's a controller that includes an action whose method name is Hiding, but I've used AttributeRouting to configure it to /spaghetti/with-nesting/where-is-waldo public class SampleController : Controller { [Route("spaghetti/with-nesting/where-is-waldo")] public string Hiding() { return "You found me!"; } } I enable that in my RouteConfig.cs, and I can use that in conjunction with my other MVC routes like this: public class RouteConfig { public static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes) { routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}"); routes.MapMvcAttributeRoutes(); routes.MapRoute( name: "Default", url: "{controller}/{action}/{id}", defaults: new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional } ); } } You can read more about Attribute Routing in ASP.NET MVC 5 here. Filter enhancements There are two new additions to filters: Authentication Filters and Filter Overrides. Authentication filters are a new kind of filter in ASP.NET MVC that run prior to authorization filters in the ASP.NET MVC pipeline and allow you to specify authentication logic per-action, per-controller, or globally for all controllers. Authentication filters process credentials in the request and provide a corresponding principal. Authentication filters can also add authentication challenges in response to unauthorized requests. Override filters let you change which filters apply to a given action method or controller. Override filters specify a set of filter types that should not be run for a given scope (action or controller). This allows you to configure filters that apply globally but then exclude certain global filters from applying to specific actions or controllers. ASP.NET Web API 2 ASP.NET Web API 2 includes a lot of new features. Attribute Routing ASP.NET Web API supports the same attribute routing system that's in ASP.NET MVC 5. You can read more about the Attribute Routing features in Web API in this article. OAuth 2.0 ASP.NET Web API picks up OAuth 2.0 support, using security middleware running on OWIN (discussed below). This is great for features like authenticated Single Page Applications. OData Improvements ASP.NET Web API now has full OData support. That required adding in some of the most powerful operators: $select, $expand, $batch and $value. You can read more about OData operator support in this article by Mike Wasson. Lots more There's a huge list of other features, including CORS (cross-origin request sharing), IHttpActionResult, IHttpRequestContext, and more. I think the best overview is in the release notes. OWIN and Katana I've written about OWIN and Katana recently. I'm a big fan. OWIN is the Open Web Interfaces for .NET. It's a spec, like HTML or HTTP, so you can't install OWIN. The benefit of OWIN is that it's a community specification, so anyone who implements it can plug into the ASP.NET stack, either as middleware or as a host. Katana is the Microsoft implementation of OWIN. It leverages OWIN to wire up things like authentication, handlers, modules, IIS hosting, etc., so ASP.NET can host OWIN components and Katana components can run in someone else's OWIN implementation. Howard Dierking just wrote a cool article in MSDN magazine describing Katana in depth: Getting Started with the Katana Project. He had an interesting example showing an OWIN based pipeline which leveraged SignalR, ASP.NET Web API and NancyFx components in the same stack. If this kind of thing makes sense to you, that's great. If it doesn't, don't worry, but keep an eye on it. You're going to see some cool things happen as a result of ASP.NET becoming more and more pluggable. Visual Studio Web Tools Okay, this stuff's just crazy. Visual Studio has been adding some nice web dev features over the past few years, but they've really cranked it up for this release. Visual Studio is by far my favorite code editor for all web files: CSS, HTML, JavaScript, and lots of popular libraries. Stop thinking of Visual Studio as a big editor that you only use to write back-end code. Stop editing HTML and CSS in Notepad (or Sublime, Notepad++, etc.). Visual Studio starts up in under 2 seconds on a modern computer with an SSD. Misspelling HTML attributes or your CSS classes or jQuery or Angular syntax is stupid. It doesn't make you a better developer, it makes you a silly person who wastes time. Browser Link Browser Link is a real-time, two-way connection between Visual Studio and all connected browsers. It's only attached when you're running locally, in debug, but it applies to any and all connected browser, including emulators. You may have seen demos that showed the browsers refreshing based on changes in the editor, and I'll agree that's pretty cool. But it's really just the start. It's a two-way connection, and it's built for extensiblity. That means you can write extensions that push information from your running application (in IE, Chrome, a mobile emulator, etc.) back to Visual Studio. Mads and team have showed off some demonstrations where they enabled edit mode in the browser which updated the source HTML back on the browser. It's also possible to look at how the rendered HTML performs, check for compatibility issues, watch for unused CSS classes, the sky's the limit. New HTML editor The previous HTML editor had a lot of old code that didn't allow for improvements. The team rewrote the HTML editor to take advantage of the new(ish) extensibility features in Visual Studio, which then allowed them to add in all kinds of features - things like CSS Class and ID IntelliSense (so you type style="" and get a list of classes and ID's for your project), smart indent based on how your document is formatted, JavaScript reference auto-sync, etc. Here's a 3 minute tour from Mads Kristensen. The previous HTML editor had a lot of old code that didn't allow for improvements. The team rewrote the HTML editor to take advantage of the new(ish) extensibility features in Visual Studio, which then allowed them to add in all kinds of features - things like CSS Class and ID IntelliSense (so you type style="" and get a list of classes and ID's for your project), smart indent based on how your document is formatted, JavaScript reference auto-sync, etc. Lots more Visual Studio web dev features That's just a sampling - there's a ton of great features for JavaScript editing, CSS editing, publishing, and Page Inspector (which shows real-time rendering of your page inside Visual Studio). Here are some more short videos showing those features. Lots, lots more Okay, that's just a summary, and it's still quite a bit. Head on over to http://asp.net/vnext for more information, and download Visual Studio 2013 now to get started!

    Read the article

  • EFMVC Migrated to .NET 4.5, Visual Studio 2012, ASP.NET MVC 4 and EF 5 Code First

    - by shiju
    I have just migrated my EFMVC app from .NET 4.0 and ASP.NET MVC 4 RC to .NET 4.5, ASP.NET MVC 4 RTM and Entity Framework 5 Code First. In this release, the EFMVC solution is built with Visual Studio 2012 RTM. The migration process was very smooth and did not made any major changes other than adding simple unit tests with NUnit and Moq. I will add more unit tests on later and will also modify the existing solution. Source Code You can download the source code from http://efmvc.codeplex.com/

    Read the article

  • Daily tech links for .net and related technologies - Mar 29-31, 2010

    - by SanjeevAgarwal
    Daily tech links for .net and related technologies - Mar 29-31, 2010 Web Development Querying the Future With Reactive Extensions - Phil Haack Creating an OData API for StackOverflow including XML and JSON in 30 minutes - Scott Hanselman MVC Automatic Menu - Nuri Halperin jqGrid for ASP.NET MVC - TriRand Team Foolproof Provides Contingent Data Annotation Validation for ASP.NET MVC 2 -Nick Riggs Using FubuMVC.UI in asp.net MVC : Getting started - Cannibal Coder Building A Custom ActionResult in MVC...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Daily tech links for .net and related technologies - May 26-29, 2010

    - by SanjeevAgarwal
    Daily tech links for .net and related technologies - May 26-29, 2010 Web Development Porting MVC Music Store to Raven: StoreController - Ayende Building a Store Locator ASP.NET Application Using Google Maps API - Scott Mitchell Anti-Forgery Request Recipes For ASP.NET MVC And AJAX - Dixin How to Localize an ASP.NET MVC Application - Michael Ceranski Tekpub ASP.NET MVC 2 Starter Site 0.5 Released - Rob Conery How to use Google Data API in ASP.NET MVC. Part 2 - Mahdi jQuery.validate and Html.ValidationSummary...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Windows Azure ASP.NET MVC 2 Role with Silverlight

    - by GeekAgilistMercenary
    I was working through some scenarios recently with Azure and Silverlight.  I immediately decided a quick walk through for setting up a Silverlight Application running in an ASP.NET MVC 2 Application would be a cool project. This walk through I have Visual Studio 2010, Silverlight 4, and the Azure SDK all installed.  If you need to download any of those go get em? now. Launch Visual Studio 2010 and start a new project.  Click on the section for cloud templates as shown below. After you name the project, the dialog for what type of Windows Azure Cloud Service Role will display.  I selected ASP.NET MVC 2 Web Role, which adds the MvcWebRole1 Project to the Cloud Service Solution. Since I selected the ASP.NET MVC 2 Project type, it immediately prompts for a unit test project.  Because I just want to get everything running first, I will probably be unit testing the Silverlight and just using the MVC Project as a host for the Silverlight for now, and because I would prefer to just add the unit test project later, I am going to select no here. Once you've created the ASP.NET MVC 2 project to host the Silverlight, then create another new project.  Select the Silverlight section under the Installed Templates in the Add New Project dialog.  Then select Silverlight Application. The next dialog that comes up will inquire about using the existing ASP.NET MVC Application I just created, which I do want it to use that so I leave it checked.  The options section however I do not want to check RIA Web Services, do not want a test page added to the project, and I want Silverlight debugging enabled so I leave that checked.  Once those options are appropriately set, just click on OK and the Silverlight Project will be added to the overall solution. The next steps now are to get the Silverlight object appropriately embedded in the web page.  First open up the Site.Master file in the ASP.NET MVC 2 Project located under the Veiws/Shared/ location.  After you open the file review the content of the <header></header> section.  In that section add another <contentplaceholder></contentplaceholder> tag as shown in the code snippet below. <head runat="server"> <title> <asp:ContentPlaceHolder ID="TitleContent" runat="server" /> </title> <link href="../../Content/Site.css" rel="stylesheet" type="text/css" /> <asp:ContentPlaceHolder ID="HeaderContent" runat="server" /> </head> I usually put it toward the bottom of the header section.  It just seems the <title></title> should be on the top of the section and I like to keep it that way. Now open up the Index.aspx page under the ASP.NET MVC 2 Project located in the Views/Home/ directory.  When you open up that file add a <asp:Content><asp:Content> tag as shown in the next snippet. <asp:Content ID="Content1" ContentPlaceHolderID="TitleContent" runat="server"> Home Page </asp:Content>   <asp:Content ID=headerContent ContentPlaceHolderID=HeaderContent runat=server>   </asp:Content>   <asp:Content ID="Content2" ContentPlaceHolderID="MainContent" runat="server"> <h2><%= Html.Encode(ViewData["Message"]) %></h2> <p> To learn more about ASP.NET MVC visit <a href="http://asp.net/mvc" title="ASP.NET MVC Website">http://asp.net/mvc</a>. </p> </asp:Content> In that center tag, I am now going to add what is needed to appropriately embed the Silverlight object into the page.  The first thing I needed is a reference to the Silverlight.js file. <script type="text/javascript" src="Silverlight.js"></script> After that comes a bit of nitty gritty Javascript.  I create another tag (and for those in the know, this is exactly like the generated code that is dumped into the *.html page generated with any Silverlight Project if you select to "add a test page that references the application".  The complete Javascript is below. function onSilverlightError(sender, args) { var appSource = ""; if (sender != null && sender != 0) { appSource = sender.getHost().Source; }   var errorType = args.ErrorType; var iErrorCode = args.ErrorCode;   if (errorType == "ImageError" || errorType == "MediaError") { return; }   var errMsg = "Unhandled Error in Silverlight Application " + appSource + "\n";   errMsg += "Code: " + iErrorCode + " \n"; errMsg += "Category: " + errorType + " \n"; errMsg += "Message: " + args.ErrorMessage + " \n";   if (errorType == "ParserError") { errMsg += "File: " + args.xamlFile + " \n"; errMsg += "Line: " + args.lineNumber + " \n"; errMsg += "Position: " + args.charPosition + " \n"; } else if (errorType == "RuntimeError") { if (args.lineNumber != 0) { errMsg += "Line: " + args.lineNumber + " \n"; errMsg += "Position: " + args.charPosition + " \n"; } errMsg += "MethodName: " + args.methodName + " \n"; }   throw new Error(errMsg); } I literally, since it seems to work fine, just use what is populated in the automatically generated page.  After getting the appropriate Javascript into place I put the actual Silverlight Object Embed code into the HTML itself.  Just so I know the positioning and for final verification when running the application I insert the embed code just below the Index.aspx page message.  As shown below. <asp:Content ID="Content2" ContentPlaceHolderID="MainContent" runat="server"> <h2> <%= Html.Encode(ViewData["Message"]) %></h2> <p> To learn more about ASP.NET MVC visit <a href="http://asp.net/mvc" title="ASP.NET MVC Website"> http://asp.net/mvc</a>. </p> <div id="silverlightControlHost"> <object data="data:application/x-silverlight-2," type="application/x-silverlight-2" width="100%" height="100%"> <param name="source" value="ClientBin/CloudySilverlight.xap" /> <param name="onError" value="onSilverlightError" /> <param name="background" value="white" /> <param name="minRuntimeVersion" value="4.0.50401.0" /> <param name="autoUpgrade" value="true" /> <a href="http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkID=149156&v=4.0.50401.0" style="text-decoration: none"> <img src="http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=161376" alt="Get Microsoft Silverlight" style="border-style: none" /> </a> </object> <iframe id="_sl_historyFrame" style="visibility: hidden; height: 0px; width: 0px; border: 0px"></iframe> </div> </asp:Content> I then open up the Silverlight Project MainPage.xaml.  Just to make it visibly obvious that the Silverlight Application is running in the page, I added a button as shown below. <UserControl x:Class="CloudySilverlight.MainPage" xmlns="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml/presentation" xmlns:x="http://schemas.microsoft.com/winfx/2006/xaml" xmlns:d="http://schemas.microsoft.com/expression/blend/2008" xmlns:mc="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/markup-compatibility/2006" mc:Ignorable="d" d:DesignHeight="300" d:DesignWidth="400">   <Grid x:Name="LayoutRoot" Background="White"> <Button Content="Button" Height="23" HorizontalAlignment="Left" Margin="48,40,0,0" Name="button1" VerticalAlignment="Top" Width="75" Click="button1_Click" /> </Grid> </UserControl> Just for kicks, I added a message box that would popup, just to show executing functionality also. private void button1_Click(object sender, RoutedEventArgs e) { MessageBox.Show("It runs in the cloud!"); } I then executed the ASP.NET MVC 2 and could see the Silverlight Application in page.  With a quick click of the button, I got a message box.  Success! Now the next step is getting the ASP.NET MVC 2 Project and Silverlight published to the cloud.  As of Visual Studio 2010, Silverlight 4, and the latest Azure SDK, this is actually a ridiculously easy process. Navigate to the Azure Cloud Services web site. Once that is open go back in Visual Studio and right click on the cloud project and select publish. This will publish two files into a directory.  Copy that directory so you can easily paste it into the Azure Cloud Services web site.  You'll have to click on the application role in the cloud (I will have another blog entry soon about where, how, and best practices in the cloud). In the text boxes shown, select the application package file and the configuration file and place them in the appropriate text boxes.  This is the part were it comes in handy to have copied the directory path of the file location.  That way when you click on browser you can just paste that in, then hit enter.  The two files will be listed and you can select the appropriate file. Once that is done, name the service deployment.  Then click on publish.  After a minute or so you will see the following screen. Now click on run.  Once the MvcWebRole1 goes green (the little light symbol to the left of the status) click on the Web Site URL.  Be patient during this process too, it could take a minute or two.  The Silverlight application should again come up just like you ran it on your local machine. Once staging is up and running, click on the circular icon with two arrows to move staging to production.  Once you are done make sure the green light is again go for the production deploy, then click on the Web Site URL to verify the site is working.  At this point I had a successful development, staging, and production deployment. Thanks for reading, hope this was helpful.  I have more Windows Azure and other cloud related material coming, so stay tuned. Original Entry

    Read the article

  • Deploying ASP.NET MVC to Windows Server 2003

    - by pete the pagan-gerbil
    Hi, I have a problem with an MVC 2 website on Windows Server 2003 running IIS 6. It is externally hosted, but we have a 2003 server internally for testing. The internal server runs the website fine, the external server gives a 403 ("website declined to show this page") error when navigating to the root of the site, and a 404 if I try to navigate directly to a page resource. I have tried the wildcard ISAPI mapping and extension mapping, and a couple of other common checks (I forget exactly which now, most of them were already set correctly), but so far no joy. All the settings can be replicated on our internal server and the pages return properly. IIS logs just show exactly what the browser shows - 404 errors and 403s. I've read about a different level of trust required for an MVC application compared to a WebForms application - how can I check permissions and trust levels on the external and internal servers (assuming I am able to check that) and if that would cause these errors, what are the minimum levels that MVC require? Failing that, what else might be causing this error for me to try out?

    Read the article

  • How to bind ArrayList Object to an ASPxGridView control

    - by nikolaosk
    I have been involved with a ASP.Net project recently and I have implemented it using the awesome DevExpress ASP.Net controls. Parts of the project involved binding data from custom objects, SqlDataSource & ObjectDataSource data sources to the ASPxGridView control. In this post I will show you how to bind data from an ArrayList object to the ASPxGridView control . If you want to implement this example you need to download the trial version of these controls unless you are a licensed holder of...(read more)

    Read the article

  • Ambiguous call between methods ASP.NET MVC

    - by GuiPereira
    I'm pretty new in ASP.NET MVC (about 3 months) and i've the followin issue: I have a Entity Class called 'Usuario' in a ClassLibrary referenced as 'Core' and, when i create a strongly-typed view and add a html.textboxfor< like: <%= Html.TextBoxFor(u => u.Login) %> it raises the following error: Error 3 The call is ambiguous between the following methods or properties: 'Microsoft.Web.Mvc.ExpressionInputExtensions.TextBoxFor<Core.Usuario,string>(System.Web.Mvc .HtmlHelper<Core.Usuario>, System.Linq.Expressions.Expression<System.Func<Core.Usuario,string>>)' and 'System.Web.Mvc.Html.InputExtensions.TextBoxFor<Core.Usuario,string>(System.Web.Mvc.HtmlHel per<Core.Usuario>, System.Linq.Expressions.Expression<System.Func<Core.Usuario,string>>)' d:\Documents\Visual Studio 2008\Projects\GuiPereiraMVC2\GuiPereiraMVC2\Views\Gestao\Index.aspx 20 25 GuiPereiraMVC2 anyone knows why?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39  | Next Page >