Search Results

Search found 15835 results on 634 pages for 'static routes'.

Page 42/634 | < Previous Page | 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49  | Next Page >

• Shorten Zend Framework Route Definitions

  - by Sebastian Hoitz

  Hi! How can I shorten the definition of my custom routes in Zend Framework? I currently have this as definition: $route = new Zend_Controller_Router_Route( ":module/:id", array( "controller" => "index", "action" => "index" ), array("id" => "\d+") ); self::$frontController->getRouter()->addRoute('shortcutOne', $route); $route = new Zend_Controller_Router_Route( ":module/:controller/:id", array("action" => "index"), array("id" => "\d+") ); self::$frontController->getRouter()->addRoute('shortcutTwo', $route); $route = new Zend_Controller_Router_Route( ":module/:controller/:action/:id", null, array("id" => "\d+") ); self::$frontController->getRouter()->addRoute('shortcutThree', $route); Is there a way to better combine these rules? And what are your best practices in where to place these? I currently have them in my bootstrap class right after the Front Controller initialization.

  Read the article

• Why did mislav-will_paginate start adding so much garbage to urls between rails 2.3.2 and 2.3.5?

  - by user30997

  I've used will_paginate in a number of projects now, but when I moved one of them to Rails 2.3.5, clicking on any of the pagination links (page number, next, prev, etc.,) went from getting nice URLs like this: http://foo.com/user/1/date/2005_01_31/phone/555-6161 to this: http://foo.com/?options[]=user&options[]=date&options[]=2005_01_31&options[]=phone&options[]=555-6161 I have a route that looks like this that is probably the source of the 'options' keyword: map.connect '/browse/*options', :controller=>'assets', :action=>'browse' It's enough of an annoyance that I'm willing to roll a paginator to get around this if there isn't a way to get back to where I was before. Is there a way to get will_paginate to turn array-style routes into sane urls again? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Routing a location that matches one controller to another

  - by Luca Romagnoli

  Hi I have a controller named "places" with some actions like "view", "new", "create" When a user goes to mysite.com/places I want to execute the action "show" of another controller called "cores" So I've put this in the routes.rb file: map.connect '/:id/show', :controller => "cores", :action => "show" But it doesn't work. I receive this error: Processing PlacesController#show (for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-04-16 00:52:07) [GET] ActionController::UnknownAction (No action responded to show. Actions: admin_denied, admin_required, auto_complete_for_location, auto_complete_for_name, change_location, create, create_facebook_session, create_facebook_session_with_secret, edit, exist, facebook_params, facebook_session, facebook_session_expired, facebook_session_parameters, get_form, is_admin?, new, one_or_true, redirect_to, render_publisher_error, render_publisher_interface, render_publisher_response, set_facebook_session, top_redirect_to, update, wants_interface?, and zero_or_false): How can i do to map that action in another controller? thanks

  Read the article

• Rails route, show all elements on the same page

  - by Igor Oliveira Antonio

  I need to show all my elements on the same page. In routes: namespace :nourishment do resources :diets do resources :nourishment_meals, :controller => 'meals' get 'nourishment_meals/show_all_meals' => 'meals#show_all_meals', as: "show_all_meals" end end which will generate: nourishment_diet_nourishment_meals_path GET /nourishment/diets/:diet_id/nourishment_meals(.:format) nourishment/meals#index POST /nourishment/diets/:diet_id/nourishment_meals(.:format) nourishment/meals#create new_nourishment_diet_nourishment_meal_path GET /nourishment/diets/:diet_id/nourishment_meals/new(.:format) nourishment/meals#new edit_nourishment_diet_nourishment_meal_path GET /nourishment/diets/:diet_id/nourishment_meals/:id/edit(.:format) nourishment/meals#edit nourishment_diet_nourishment_meal_path GET /nourishment/diets/:diet_id/nourishment_meals/:id(.:format) nourishment/meals#show PATCH /nourishment/diets/:diet_id/nourishment_meals/:id(.:format) nourishment/meals#update PUT /nourishment/diets/:diet_id/nourishment_meals/:id(.:format) nourishment/meals#update DELETE /nourishment/diets/:diet_id/nourishment_meals/:id(.:format) nourishment/meals#destroy [**THIS**] nourishment_diet_show_all_meals_path GET /nourishment/diets/:diet_id/nourishment_meals/show_all_meals(.:format) nourishment/meals#show_all_meals The problem, when I do this: <%= link_to "Show all meals", nourishment_diet_show_all_meals_path, :class=>"button green" %> This error raise: Problem: Document(s) not found for class NourishmentMeal with id(s) show_all. Summary: When calling NourishmentMeal.find with an id or array of ids, each parameter must match a document Can someone help me?

  Read the article

• Localization with separate Language folders within Views

  - by Adrian

  I'm trying to have specific folders for each language in Views. (I know this isn't the best way of doing it but it has to be this way for now) e.g. /Views/EN/User/Edit.aspx /Views/US/User/Edit.aspx These would both use the same controller and model but have different Views for each language. In my Global.asax.cs I have routes.MapRoute( "Default", // Route name "{language}/{controller}/{action}/{id}", // URL with parameters new { language = "en", controller = "Logon", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional }, // Parameter defaults new { language = @"en|us" } // validation ); This works ok but always points to the same View. If I put the path to the Lanagugage folder it works return View("~/Views/EN/User/Edit.aspx"); but clearly this isn't a very nice way to do it. Is there anyway to get MVC to look in the correct language folder? Thanks and again I know this isn't the best way of doing Localization but I can't use resource files.

  Read the article

• Pattern filters in Laravel 4

  - by ali A

  I want to make a pattern route, to redirect users to login page when they are not logged in. I searched but couldn't find a solution. as always Laravel's Documentation is useless! I have this in my filter.php Route::filter('auth', function() { if (Auth::guest()) return Redirect::guest('login'); }); Route::filter('auth.basic', function() { return Auth::basic(); }); And this route in my routes.php Route::when('/*', 'auth' ); but It's not working. How can I do that?

  Read the article

• routing map a action controller

  - by Luca Romagnoli

  Hi i have a controller named "places" with some action like "view", "new", "create" When a user try to launch mysite.com/places i want that is execute the action show of a another controller called "cores" so in the routes.rb file i've put this: map.connect '/:id/show', :controller => "cores", :action => "show" But it doesn't work. I receive this error: Processing PlacesController#show (for 127.0.0.1 at 2010-04-16 00:52:07) [GET] ActionController::UnknownAction (No action responded to show. Actions: admin_denied, admin_required, auto_complete_for_location, auto_complete_for_name, change_location, create, create_facebook_session, create_facebook_session_with_secret, edit, exist, facebook_params, facebook_session, facebook_session_expired, facebook_session_parameters, get_form, is_admin?, new, one_or_true, redirect_to, render_publisher_error, render_publisher_interface, render_publisher_response, set_facebook_session, top_redirect_to, update, wants_interface?, and zero_or_false): How can i do to map that action in another controller? thanks

  Read the article

• ASP.NET MVC Routing

  - by creativeincode

  My website uses categories and sub-categories. I'd like the follow mapping: /Category/Fruit /Category/Fruit/Apples But if I use the below: routes.MapRoute( "Category", // Route name "Category/{category}/{subcategory}", // URL with parameters new { controller = "Entity", action = "Category" } // Parameter defaults ); I get a 404 for /Category/Fruit however /Category/Fruit/Apples works ok. I'd like /Category/Fruit to work as well but I can't add another route with the same name. How do I get around this? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• one codeigniter controller named site needs to handle multiple domains

  - by Mauricio Webtailor

  Got a controller in codeigniter who handles different sub sites. site/index/1 fetches content for subsite a site/index/2 fetches content for subsite b Now we decided to register domain names for these sub sites. so what we need: http://www.subsite1.com - default controller should be site/index/1 without the site/index/1 in the uri http://www.subsite2.com - default controller should be site/index/2 without the site/index/2 in the uri I fiddled and tried to play with routes.php but getting nowhere.. Can somebody point me in the right direction?

  Read the article

• link_to_remote does not generate correct url in Haml

  - by mathee

  In Haml, I've been trying to get the following link_to_remote call to work. It's called from the /questions/new view. #{link_to_remote image_tag('x.png'), :url => {:controller => 'questions', :action => 'remove_tag_from_cart'}} I've tried the following variations. #{link_to_remote image_tag('x.png'), :url => {:controller => :questions, :action => :remove_tag_from_cart}} #{link_to_remote image_tag('x.png'), :controller => 'questions', :action => 'remove_tag_from_cart'} #{link_to_remote image_tag('x.png'), :controller => :questions, :action => :remove_tag_from_cart} In every case, I get the following link: /questions/new#. I'm not sure why! I also have the following in routes.rb, thinking that was the problem... map.connect ':controller/remove_tag_from_cart', :action => 'remove_tag_from_cart'

  Read the article

• Add RESTful Action

  - by Drew Rush

  The source of my information is section 2.9 here: [http://guides.rubyonrails.org/routing.html#connecting-urls-to-code][1] What I'm trying to do is add a custom action "search" and corresponding view. So, as it says to do in the documentation, I've added this code in my config/routes.rb file: resources :dimensions do collection do get "search" end end I've also defined in the dimensions_controller file: def search @dimensions = Dimension.all respond_to do |format| format.html # search.html.erb format.json { render json: @dimensions } end end I then stopped and restarted the rails server, but when I navigate to /dimensions/home, I'm still getting this error message: Couldn't find Dimension with id=search Also showing that my parameter is: {"id"=>"search"} So am I just missing another bit of code that gives the instruction to interpret /dimension/search as a collection action as opposed to the show action? Thanks for your time.

  Read the article

• MVC route with id and sub-action

  - by Dan Revell

  I can't figure out what I need to do with MVC routing to make this work Here's my one route: routes.MapHttpRoute( name: "DefaultApi", routeTemplate: "{controller}/{id}/{action}", defaults: new { id = RouteParameter.Optional, action = RouteParameter.Optional } ); The request /Shipments/ works great. The request /Shipments/3/Packages works great. The request /Shipments/3 however fails with the error: Multiple actions were found that match the request: System.Linq.IQueryable`1[Api.Controllers.RequisitionsController+PackageRequisitionWithTracking] GetPackageRequisitions(Int32) on type Api.Controllers.RequisitionsController Api.Models.ShipmentRequisition GetShipmentRequisitions(Int32) on type Api.Controllers.RequisitionsController It can't seem to differentiate between: public ShipmentRequisition GetShipmentRequisitions(int id) and [ActionName("Packages")] public IQueryable<PackageRequisitionWithTracking> GetPackageRequisitions(int id) I would have thought the lack of action name on the get shipment by id would allow that route to work.

  Read the article

• Namespace with index action in Rails

  - by yuval

  I have an admin controller located inside /controllers/admin/admin_controller.rb I also have a pages controller located inside /controllers/admin/pages_controller.rb In my routes.rb file, I have the following: map.namespace :admin do |admin| admin.resources :pages end When the user goes to localhost:3000/admin, I'd like the user to see a page with a link to /admin/pages (Pages CRUD) and to / (To go back home). Since I am using a namespace, I cannot have an index action for /admin. How would I get this done and still have my controllers located inside my /controllers/admin folder (rather than using admin as a map.resources component and a has_many association to pages). Please note I am only interested in the show action of admin. Thank you!

  Read the article

• Devise role based routing

  - by teknull

  I have an app with multiple users. Each user as a theoretical role (user, client, etc). I've designed a view/controller for each user type. I want to be able to login each type of user do a different root url and lock them to it. Originally I was going to add a column to Users in Devise called role and so I can differentiate the users. The problem I'm having is how to say in routes.rb if current_user.role == "client" root :to = 'controller#index' Once they are logged in to the page I also want to keep them from being able to visit any of my other paths ie: domain.com/calls domain.com/units I've been looking into cancan to run alongside Devise but I'm not sure if this is the answer.

  Read the article

• Routing fails when only category is supplied

  - by creativeincode

  My website uses categories and sub-categories. I'd like the follow mapping: /Category/Fruit /Category/Fruit/Apples But if I use the below: routes.MapRoute( "Category", // Route name "Category/{category}/{subcategory}", // URL with parameters new { controller = "Entity", action = "Category" } // Parameter defaults ); I get a 404 for /Category/Fruit however /Category/Fruit/Apples works ok. I'd like /Category/Fruit to work as well but I can't add another route with the same name. How do I get around this? Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• how can I add a new action to a controller?

  - by Angela

  I used the following in routes to add a new action to my Email controller: map.resources :emails, :member => { :newfwd => :put} The expected result was that newfwd_email_path(:id = 1) would generate the following urL: emails/1/newfwd It does. But I get an error, it treats '1' as an action and 'newfwd' as an id. I want '1' to be interpreted as the id for emails, upon which the newfwd action acts. I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong. (Note: I am using Rails 2.3.8)

  Read the article

• will_paginate route only works on page > 1

  - by Avishai

  I have the following routes defined: map.resources :categories, :has_many => :downloads map.resources :downloads, :member => {:go => :get}, :collection => {:tag => :get} map.connect '/downlods/page/:page', :controller => 'downloads', :action => 'index' map.connect '/categories/:category_id/downloads/page/:page', :controller => 'downloads', :action => 'index' For some reason, the first page that the will_paginate helper is called on causes links with ?page=2 to be rendered, while subsequent pages have links with /downloads/page/2. Do you know what might be causing this?

  Read the article

• Using non-Railsy route to prepopulate a form

  - by user94154

  I have many instances of a Rails model, Post. When viewing an individual post, I'd like to create a form to create a child of Post called Comment. I'd like to prepopulate this form with a hidden tag that contains the post_id which is the foreign key in Comment. The Railsy way to do this is to create a fancy-ish route such as: /comments/new/post/:post_id However, this gunks up the routes file and doesn't leave much flexibility. Let's say I want to create a link somewhere else that prepopulates a different attribute of the form...then I'd have to add another route for this. So I think I'm going to create urls like this on /posts/show/:id: /comments/new?comment[post_id]=<%= @post.id %> This way I can add any other attributes as I need. I know the plus side associated with this, now what are the downsides?

  Read the article

• C#: System.Lazy&lt;T&gt; and the Singleton Design Pattern

  - by James Michael Hare

  So we've all coded a Singleton at one time or another.  It's a really simple pattern and can be a slightly more elegant alternative to global variables.  Make no mistake, Singletons can be abused and are often over-used -- but occasionally you find a Singleton is the most elegant solution. For those of you not familiar with a Singleton, the basic Design Pattern is that a Singleton class is one where there is only ever one instance of the class created.  This means that constructors must be private to avoid users creating their own instances, and a static property (or method in languages without properties) is defined that returns a single static instance. 1: public class Singleton 2: { 3: // the single instance is defined in a static field 4: private static readonly Singleton _instance = new Singleton(); 5:  6: // constructor private so users can't instantiate on their own 7: private Singleton() 8: { 9: } 10:  11: // read-only property that returns the static field 12: public static Singleton Instance 13: { 14: get 15: { 16: return _instance; 17: } 18: } 19: } This is the most basic singleton, notice the key features: Static readonly field that contains the one and only instance. Constructor is private so it can only be called by the class itself. Static property that returns the single instance. Looks like it satisfies, right?  There's just one (potential) problem.  C# gives you no guarantee of when the static field _instance will be created.  This is because the C# standard simply states that classes (which are marked in the IL as BeforeFieldInit) can have their static fields initialized any time before the field is accessed.  This means that they may be initialized on first use, they may be initialized at some other time before, you can't be sure when. So what if you want to guarantee your instance is truly lazy.  That is, that it is only created on first call to Instance?  Well, there's a few ways to do this.  First we'll show the old ways, and then talk about how .Net 4.0's new System.Lazy<T> type can help make the lazy-Singleton cleaner. Obviously, we could take on the lazy construction ourselves, but being that our Singleton may be accessed by many different threads, we'd need to lock it down. 1: public class LazySingleton1 2: { 3: // lock for thread-safety laziness 4: private static readonly object _mutex = new object(); 5:  6: // static field to hold single instance 7: private static LazySingleton1 _instance = null; 8:  9: // property that does some locking and then creates on first call 10: public static LazySingleton1 Instance 11: { 12: get 13: { 14: if (_instance == null) 15: { 16: lock (_mutex) 17: { 18: if (_instance == null) 19: { 20: _instance = new LazySingleton1(); 21: } 22: } 23: } 24:  25: return _instance; 26: } 27: } 28:  29: private LazySingleton1() 30: { 31: } 32: } This is a standard double-check algorithm so that you don't lock if the instance has already been created.  However, because it's possible two threads can go through the first if at the same time the first time back in, you need to check again after the lock is acquired to avoid creating two instances. Pretty straightforward, but ugly as all heck.  Well, you could also take advantage of the C# standard's BeforeFieldInit and define your class with a static constructor.  It need not have a body, just the presence of the static constructor will remove the BeforeFieldInit attribute on the class and guarantee that no fields are initialized until the first static field, property, or method is called.   1: public class LazySingleton2 2: { 3: // because of the static constructor, this won't get created until first use 4: private static readonly LazySingleton2 _instance = new LazySingleton2(); 5:  6: // Returns the singleton instance using lazy-instantiation 7: public static LazySingleton2 Instance 8: { 9: get { return _instance; } 10: } 11:  12: // private to prevent direct instantiation 13: private LazySingleton2() 14: { 15: } 16:  17: // removes BeforeFieldInit on class so static fields not 18: // initialized before they are used 19: static LazySingleton2() 20: { 21: } 22: } Now, while this works perfectly, I hate it.  Why?  Because it's relying on a non-obvious trick of the IL to guarantee laziness.  Just looking at this code, you'd have no idea that it's doing what it's doing.  Worse yet, you may decide that the empty static constructor serves no purpose and delete it (which removes your lazy guarantee).  Worse-worse yet, they may alter the rules around BeforeFieldInit in the future which could change this. So, what do I propose instead?  .Net 4.0 adds the System.Lazy type which guarantees thread-safe lazy-construction.  Using System.Lazy<T>, we get: 1: public class LazySingleton3 2: { 3: // static holder for instance, need to use lambda to construct since constructor private 4: private static readonly Lazy<LazySingleton3> _instance 5: = new Lazy<LazySingleton3>(() => new LazySingleton3()); 6:  7: // private to prevent direct instantiation. 8: private LazySingleton3() 9: { 10: } 11:  12: // accessor for instance 13: public static LazySingleton3 Instance 14: { 15: get 16: { 17: return _instance.Value; 18: } 19: } 20: } Note, you need your lambda to call the private constructor as Lazy's default constructor can only call public constructors of the type passed in (which we can't have by definition of a Singleton).  But, because the lambda is defined inside our type, it has access to the private members so it's perfect. Note how the Lazy<T> makes it obvious what you're doing (lazy construction), instead of relying on an IL generation side-effect.  This way, it's more maintainable.  Lazy<T> has many other uses as well, obviously, but I really love how elegant and readable it makes the lazy Singleton.

  Read the article

• Enabling Http caching and compression in IIS 7 for asp.net websites

  - by anil.kasalanati

  Caching – There are 2 ways to set Http caching 1-      Use Max age property 2-      Expires header. Doing the changes via IIS Console – 1.       Select the website for which you want to enable caching and then select Http Responses in the features tab       2.       Select the Expires webcontent and on changing the After setting you can generate the max age property for the cache control    3.       Following is the screenshot of the headers   Then you can use some tool like fiddler and see 302 response coming from the server. Doing it web.config way – We can add static content section in the system.webserver section <system.webServer>   <staticContent>             <clientCache cacheControlMode="UseMaxAge" cacheControlMaxAge="365.00:00:00" />   </staticContent> Compression - By default static compression is enabled on IIS 7.0 but the only thing which falls under that category is CSS but this is not enough for most of the websites using lots of javascript.  If you just thought by enabling dynamic compression would fix this then you are wrong so please follow following steps –   In some machines the dynamic compression is not enabled and following are the steps to enable it – Open server manager Roles > Web Server (IIS) Role Services (scroll down) > Add Role Services Add desired role (Web Server > Performance > Dynamic Content Compression) Next, Install, Wait…Done!   ?  Roles > Web Server (IIS) ?  Role Services (scroll down) > Add Role Services     Add desired role (Web Server > Performance > Dynamic Content Compression)     Next, Install, Wait…Done!     Enable  - ?  Open server manager ?  Roles > Web Server (IIS) > Internet Information Services (IIS) Manager   Next pane: Sites > Default Web Site > Your Web Site Main pane: IIS > Compression         Then comes the custom configuration for encrypting javascript resources. The problem is that the compression in IIS 7 completely works on the mime types and by default there is a mismatch in the mime types Go to following location C:\Windows\System32\inetsrv\config Open applicationHost.config The mimemap is as follows  <mimeMap fileExtension=".js" mimeType="application/javascript" />   So the section in the staticTypes should be changed          <add mimeType="application/javascript" enabled="true" />     Doing the web.config way –   We can add following section in the system.webserver section <system.webServer> <urlCompression doDynamicCompression="false"  doStaticCompression="true"/> More Information/References – ·         http://weblogs.asp.net/owscott/archive/2009/02/22/iis-7-compression-good-bad-how-much.aspx ·         http://www.west-wind.com/weblog/posts/98538.aspx  

  Read the article

• What functionality does dynamic typing allow?

  - by Justin984

  I've been using python for a few days now and I think I understand the difference between dynamic and static typing. What I don't understand is under what circumstances it would be preferred. It is flexible and readable, but at the expense of more runtime checks and additional required unit testing. Aside from non-functional criteria like flexibility and readability, what reasons are there to choose dynamic typing? What can I do with dynamic typing that isn't possible otherwise? What specific code example can you think of that illustrates a concrete advantage of dynamic typing?

  Read the article

• Are there any empirical studies on the effect of different languages on software quality?

  - by jgre

  The proponents of functional programming languages assert that functional programming makes it easier to reason about code. Those in favor of statically typed languages say that their compilers catch enough errors to make up for the additional complexity of type systems. But everything I read on these topics is based on rational argument, not on empirical data. Are there any empirical studies on what effects the different categories of programming languages have on defect rates or other quality metrics? (The answers to this question seem to indicate that there are no such studies, at least not for the dynamic vs. static debate)

  Read the article

• best practice for last-modified and created dates

  - by drewbenn

  I have a website with a handful (currently 3; I anticipate about a dozen when it's complete) of static html pages. I'd like to include "created" and "last-modified" dates in the pages for the benefit of visitors who arrive a week or a month or a few years from now. I expect anyone who cares to be viewing the source, so I could do: <!-- created yyyy-mm-dd, last-modified yyyy-mm-dd --> but I'd like to use something more standard (and elegant). I've found one reference to last modified (but only a mention in the text, not an actual code reference, so I'm not positive how to properly implement it) but not created. Is there a proper way to display both (or at least one) of these dates?

  Read the article

• An Object reference is required for the non-static field

  - by Muhammad Akhtar

  I have make my existing method to static method to get access in javascript, like.. [WebMethod(EnableSession = true), ScriptMethod()] public static void Build(String ID) { Control releaseControl = LoadControl("~/Controls/MyControl.ascx"); //An Object reference is required for the non-static field, mthod or property // 'System.Web.UI.TemplateControl.LoadControl(string)' plc.Controls.Add(releaseControl); // where plc is place holder control //object reference is required for the nonstatic field, method, or property '_Default.pl' } When I build I am getting error and I have posted these in comments below each line before converted it to static method, it working perfectly. Please suggest me the solution of my issue. Thanks

  Read the article

• Can't define static abstract string property

  - by goombaloon

  I've run into an interesting problem and am looking for some suggestions on how best to handle this... I have an abstract class that contains a static method that accepts a static string that I would like to define as an abstract property. Problem is that C# doesn't doesn't support the following (see the ConfigurationSectionName and Current properties): public abstract class ProviderConfiguration : ConfigurationSection { private const string _defaultProviderPropertyName = "defaultProvider"; private const string _providersPropertyName = "providers"; protected static string ConfigurationSectionName { get; } public static Configuration Current { get { return Configuration)ConfigurationManager.GetSection(ConfigurationSectionName); } } } I suppose one way to handle this would be to make ConfigurationSectionName NOT abstract and then create a new definition of ConfigurationSectionName in the derived classes, but that feels pretty hackish. Any suggestions would be most welcome. Gratias!!!

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49  | Next Page >