Search Results

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

Page 51/1497 | < Previous Page | 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58  | Next Page >

• Should I use a unit testing framework to validate XML documents?

  - by christofr

  From http://www.w3.org/XML/Schema: [XML Schemas] provide a means for defining the structure, content and semantics of XML documents. I'm using an XML Schema (XSD) to validate several large XML documents. While I'm finding plenty of support within XSD for checking the structure of my documents, there are no procedural if/else features that allow me to say, for instance, If Country is USA, then Zipcode cannot be empty. I'm comfortable using unit testing frameworks, and could quite happily use a framework to test content integrity. Am I asking for trouble doing it this way, rather than an alternative approach? Has anybody tried this with good / bad results? -- Edit: I didn't include this information to keep it technology agnostic, but I would be using C# / Linq / xUnit for deserialization / testing.

  Read the article

• Server Error in '/' Application. - The resource cannot be Found.

  - by Bigced_21

  I am new to ASP.NET MVC 2. I do not understand why I am receiving this error. Is there something missing that i'm not referencing correctly. I'm trying to create a simple jquery autocomplete online search textbox and view the details of the person that i select using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Web; using System.Web.Mvc; using System.Web.Mvc.Ajax; using DOC_Kools.Models; namespace DOC_Kools.Controllers { public class HomeController : Controller { private KOOLSEntities _dataModel = new KOOLSEntities(); // // GET: /Home/ public ActionResult Index() { ViewData["Message"] = "Welcome to ASP.NET MVC!"; return View(); } // // GET: /Home/ public ActionResult getAjaxResult(string q) { string searchResult = string.Empty; var offenders = (from o in _dataModel.OffenderSet where o.LastName.Contains(q) orderby o.LastName select o).Take(10); foreach (Offender o in offenders) { searchResult += string.Format("{0}|r\n", o.LastName); } return Content(searchResult); } [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] public ActionResult Search(string searchTerm) { if (searchTerm == string.Empty) { return View(); } else { // if the search contains only one result return detials // otherwise a list var offenders = from o in _dataModel.OffenderSet where o.LastName.Contains(searchTerm) orderby o.LastName select o; if (offenders.Count() == 0) { return View("not found"); } if (offenders.Count() > 1) { return View("List", offenders); } else { return RedirectToAction("Details", new { id = offenders.First().SPN }); } } } // // GET: /Home/Details/5 public ActionResult Details(int id) { return View(); } // // GET: /Home/Create public ActionResult Create() { return View(); } // // POST: /Home/Create [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] public ActionResult Create(FormCollection collection) { try { // TODO: Add insert logic here return RedirectToAction("Index"); } catch { return View(); } } // // GET: /Home/Edit/5 public ActionResult Edit(int id) { return View(); } // // POST: /Home/Edit/5 [AcceptVerbs(HttpVerbs.Post)] public ActionResult Edit(int id, FormCollection collection) { try { // TODO: Add update logic here return RedirectToAction("Index"); } catch { return View(); } } public ActionResult About() { return View(); } } } using System; using System.Collections.Generic; using System.Linq; using System.Web; using System.Web.Mvc; using System.Web.Routing; namespace DOC_Kools { // Note: For instructions on enabling IIS6 or IIS7 classic mode, // visit http://go.microsoft.com/?LinkId=9394801 public class MvcApplication : System.Web.HttpApplication { public static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes) { routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}"); routes.MapRoute( "Default", // Route name "{controller}/{action}/{id}", // URL with parameters new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = "" } // Parameter defaults ); routes.MapRoute( "OffenderSearch", "Offenders/Search/{searchTerm}", new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", searchTerm = "" } ); routes.MapRoute( "OffenderAjaxSearch", "Offenders/getAjaxResult/", new { controller = "Home", action = "getAjaxResult" } ); } protected void Application_Start() { AreaRegistration.RegisterAllAreas(); RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes); } } } <%@ Page Title="" Language="C#" MasterPageFile="~/Views/Shared/Site.Master" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage<DOC_Kools.Models.Offender>" %> $(document).ready(function() { $("#searchTerm").autocomplete("/Offenders/getAjaxResult/"); }); Home Page <%= Html.Encode(ViewData["Message"]) % <h2>Look for an offender</h2> <form action="/Offenders/Search" method="post" id="searchForm"> <input type="text" name="searchTerm" id="searchTerm" value="" size="10" maxlength="30" /> <input type="submit" value="Search" /> </form> <br /> what do i have to do in order for the textbox search to display on the index page? What else do i have to do for the autocomplete to function correctly. i have the autocomplete.js & jquery.js added to the index.aspx view Any help will be appreciated so that i can get this working. Thanks!

  Read the article

• How to configure ASP.NET MVC 3 on IIS 6 (Windows 2003 R2)

  - by Nedcode

  I am getting 403 Directory Listing Denied for the root and 404 for an action that I know should exist. Background: I have build and deployed an ASP.NET MVC 2 applcation a long time ago. Later I upgraded it to MVC 3 and it is still working with not configuration changes. Setting it up on a windows 2003 R2 (Standard) initialy was a pain, but after a couple of days(yes, days) struggling it started working. Now I have to do the same with the same application on a different server (2003 R2 Standard again) on a different network. .Net 4 is installed and allowed ASP.NET MVC 3 is also installed By default IIS is set to use .net 4 I verify aspnet_isapi.dll used in application extension are from version 4.0.30319 .NET asemblies folder. I also added the wildcard mapping to aspnet_isapi.dll and unchecked verify file exists. Under Directory Security in Authentication Methods I have disabled anonymos access and enabled Integrated Windows authentication(same as the one on the server that it works) I have copied the same web.config with the <authentication mode="Windows" /> <authorization> <deny users="?" /> </authorization> I have set Read & Execute, List Folder Contents, and Read for the Networkservice account(under which the app pool is working). Also I have set the same for Network account, IIS_WPG, ASPNET and IUSR_MAchineName. I do not have an EnableExte??nsionlessUrls but even if I create it and set it to true or false it does not help. I also tried http://haacked.com/archive/2010/12/22/asp-net-mvc-3-extensionless-urls-on-iis-6.aspx and it did not help. But I kept getting 403 Directory Listing Denied for the root and 404 for an action that I know should exist. Web Platform installer was then used to re-install and possibly update .net, asp.net etc. I then noticed IIS was reset to default. So I added the wildcard mapping again. No, luck still 403. I exported configuration files from the working server setup and created new default app pool and new default website using those configurations. Still I get 403 Directory Listing Denied for the / and 404 for any action I try.

  Read the article

• How to create a MVC 2 DisplayTemplate for a field whose display format is dependent on another field

  - by Glenn

  If I have a property whose display format is dependent on the value of another property in the view model how do I create a display template for it? The combination of field1's display being dependent on field2's value will be used throughout the app and I would like to encapsulate this in a MVC 2 display template. To be more specific, I've already create a display template (Social.ascx) for custom data type Social that masks a social security number for display. For instance, XXX-XX-1234. [DataType("Social")] public string SocialSecurityNumber { get; set; } All employees also have an employeeID. Certain companies use the employee's social security number as either the whole employee id or as part of it. I need to also mask the employeeID if it contains the social. I'd like to create another display template (EmpID.ascx) to perform this task. [DataType("EmpID")] public string EmployeeID { get; set; } The problem is that I don't know how to get both properties in the "EmpID" template to be able to perform the comparison. Thanks for the help.

  Read the article

• 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

• How to mock the Request.ServerVariables using MOQ for ASP.NET MVC?

  - by melaos

  hi guys, i'm just learning to put in unit testing for my asp.net mvc when i came to learn about the mock and the different frameworks there is out there now. after checking SO, i found that MOQ seems to be the easiest to pick up. as of now i'm stuck trying to mock the Request.ServerVariables, as after reading this post, i've learned that it's better to abstract them into property. as such: /// <summary> /// Return the server port /// </summary> protected string ServerPort { get { return Request.ServerVariables.Get("SERVER_PORT"); } } But i'm having a hard time learning how to properly mock this. I have a home controller ActionResult function which grabs the user server information and proceed to create a form to grab the user's information. i tried to use hanselman's mvcmockhelpers class but i'm not sure how to use it. this is what i have so far... [Test] public void Create_Redirects_To_ProductAdded_On_Success() { FakeViewEngine engine = new FakeViewEngine(); HomeController controller = new HomeController(); controller.ViewEngine = engine; MvcMockHelpers.SetFakeControllerContext(controller); controller.Create(); var results = controller.Create(); var typedResults = results as RedirectToRouteResult; Assert.AreEqual("", typedResults.RouteValues["action"], "Wrong action"); Assert.AreEqual("", typedResults.RouteValues["controller"], "Wrong controller"); } Questions: As of now i'm still getting null exception error when i'm running the test. So what am i missing here? And if i use the mvcmockhelpers class, how can i still call the request.verifyall function to ensure all the mocking are properly setup?

  Read the article

• How do I unit test controllers for an asp.net mvc site that uses StructureMap and NHibernate?

  - by Jim Geurts

  I have an asp.net mvc2 application that is using StructureMap 2.6 and NHibernate 3.x. I would like to add unit tests to the application but am sort of at a loss for how to accomplish it. Say I have a basic controller called Posts that has an action called Index. The controller looks something like: public class PostsController : Controller { private readonly IPostService _postService; public PostsController(IPostService postService) { _postService = postService; } public ActionResult Index() { return View(_postService.QueryOver<Post>().Future()); } } If I wanted to create an nunit test that would verify that the index action is returning all of the posts, how do I go about that? If mocking is recommended, do you just assume that interaction with the database will work? Sorry for asking such a broad question, but my web searches haven't turned up anything decent for how to unit test asp.net mvc actions that use StructureMap (or any other IOC) and NHibernate. btw, if you don't like that I return a QueryOver object from my post service, pretend it is an IQueryable object. I'm using it essentially in the same way.

  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

• MVC 3, View Model for user registration process. Password validation not working properly

  - by sec_goat

  I am trying to create a user registration page using MVC 3, so that I can better understand the process of how it works, what's going on behind the scenes etc. I am running into some issues when trying to use [Compare] to check to see that the user entered the same password twice. I tried adding the ComparePassword field to my user model first, and found that would not work the way I wanted as I did not have the field in the database, so the obvious answer was to create a View Model using the same information including the ComparePassword field. So I now have created a User model and a RegistrationViewModel, however it appears that the [Compare] on the password is not returning anything, for instance no matter what I put in the two boxes, when I click create it gives no error, which seems to me to mean it was successfully validated. I am not sure what I am doing or not doing to make this work properly. I have tried updating the jQuery.Validate to the newest version as there were some bugs reported in older version, this has not helped my efforts. Below is a wall of code, that is what I am working with. } public class RegistrationViewModel { [Required] [StringLength(15, MinimumLength = 3)] [Display(Name = "User Name")] [RegularExpression(@"(\S)+", ErrorMessage = " White Space is not allowed in User Names")] [ScaffoldColumn(false)] public String Username { get; set; } [Required] [StringLength(15, MinimumLength = 3)] [Display(Name = "First Name")] public String firstName { get; set; } [Required] [StringLength(15, MinimumLength = 3)] [Display(Name = "Last Name")] public String lastName { get; set; } [Required] [Display(Name = "Email")] public String email { get; set; } [Required] [Display(Name = "Password")] [DataType(DataType.Password)] public String password { get; set; } [Required] [DataType(DataType.Password)] [Display(Name = "Re-enter Password")] [Compare("Password", ErrorMessage = "Passwords do not match.")] public String comparePassword { get; set; } }

  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

• ASP.net MVC 2.0 using the same form for adding and editing.

  - by Chevex

  I would like to use the same view for editing a blog post and adding a blog post. However, I'm having an issue with the ID. When adding a blog post, I have no need for an ID value to be posted. When model binding binds the form values to the BlogPost object in the controller, it will auto-generate the ID in entity framework entity. When I am editing a blog post I DO need a hidden form field to store the ID in so that it accompanies the next form post. Here is the view I have right now. <% using (Html.BeginForm("CommitEditBlogPost", "Admin")) { %> <% if (Model != null) { %> <%: Html.HiddenFor(x => x.Id)%> <% } %> Title:<br /> <%: Html.TextBoxFor(x => x.Title, new { Style = "Width: 90%;" })%> <br /> <br /> Summary:<br /> <%: Html.TextAreaFor(x => x.Summary, new { Style = "Width: 90%; Height: 50px;" }) %> <br /> <br /> Body:<br /> <%: Html.TextAreaFor(x => x.Body, new { Style = "Height: 250px; Width: 90%;" })%> <br /> <br /> <input type="submit" value="Submit" /> <% } %> Right now checking if the model is coming in NULL is a great way to know if I'm editing a blog post or adding one, because when I'm adding one it will be null as it hasn't been created yet. The problem comes in when there is an error and the entity is invalid. When the controller renders the form after an invalid model the Model != null evaluates to false, even though we are editing a post and there is clearly a model. If I render the hidden input field for ID when adding a post, I get an error stating that the ID can't be null. Any help is appreciated. EDIT: I went with OJ's answer for this question, however I discovered something that made me feel silly and I wanted to share it just in case anyone was having a similar issue. The page the adds/edits blogs does not even need a hidden field for id, ever. The reason is because when I go to add a blog I do a GET to this relative URL BlogProject/Admin/AddBlogPost This URL does not contain an ID and the action method just renders the page. The page does a POST to the same URL when adding the blog post. The incoming BlogPost entity has a null Id and is generated by EF during save changes. The same thing happens when I edit blog posts. The URL is BlogProject/Admin/EditBlogPost/{Id} This URL contains the id of the blog post and since the page is posting back to the exact same URL the id goes with the POST to the action method that executes the edit. The only problem I encountered with this is that the action methods cannot have identical signatures. [HttpGet] public ViewResult EditBlogPost(int Id) { } [HttpPost] public ViewResult EditBlogPost(int Id) { } The compiler will yell at you if you try to use these two methods above. It is far too convenient that the Id will be posted back when doing a Html.BeginForm() with no arguments for action or controller. So rather than change the name of the POST method I just modified the arguments to include a FormCollection. Like this: [HttpPost] public ViewResult EditBlogPost(int Id, FormCollection formCollection) { // You can then use formCollection as the IValueProvider for UpdateModel() // and TryUpdateModel() if you wish. I mean, you might as well use the // argument since you're taking it. } The formCollection variable is filled via model binding with the same content that Request.Form would be by default. You don't have to use this collection for UpdateModel() or TryUpdateModel() but I did just so I didn't feel like that collection was pointless since it really was just to make the method signature different from its GET counterpart. Thanks for the help guys!

  Read the article

• Forcing EditorFor to prefix input items on view with Class Name?

  - by Kohan

  I have an EditorFor: <%: Html.EditorFor(model => model.Client, "ClientTemplate", new { editing = false })%> This will bind coming down to the view fine (as expected) but will not bind bind back when the model gets posted. This is due to the form id's not being prefixed with "Client." Usually in this situation i just pass in model and then bind the inputs to model.Client.PropertyName in the Template but this is not an option in this case as the template is used on two different viewmodels (that have client on). Any suggestions on getting this to bind properly? Many thanks, Kohan.

  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

< Previous Page | 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58  | Next Page >