Search Results

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

Page 9/1497 | < Previous Page | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  | Next Page >

  • Is ASP.NET MVC is really MVC? Or how to separate model from controller?

    - by Andrey
    Hi all, This question is a bit rhetorical. At some point i got a feeling that ASP.NET MVC is not that authentic implementation of MVC pattern. Or i didn't understood it. Consider following domain: electric bulb, switch and motion detector. They are connected together and when you enter the room motion detector switches on the bulb. If i want to represent them as MVC: switch is model, because it holds the state and contains logic bulb is view, because it presents the state of model to human motion detector is controller, because it converts user actions to generic model commands Switch has one private field (On/Off) as a State and two methods (PressOn, PressOff). If you call PressOn when it is Off it goes to On, if you call it again state doesn't change. Bulb can be replaced with buzzer, motion detector with timer or button, but the model still represent the same logic. Eventually system will have same behavior. This is how i understand classical MVC decomposition, please correct me if i am wrong. Now let's decompose it in ASP.Net MVC way. Bulb is still a view Controller will be switch + motion detector Model is some object that will just pass state to bulb. So the logic that defines behavior moves to controller. Question 1: Is my understanding of MVC and ASP.NET MVC correct? Question 2: If yes, do you agree that ASP.NET MVC is not 100% accurate implementation? And back to life. The final question is how to separate model from controller in case of ASP.NET MVC. There can be two extremes. Controller does basic stuff and call model to do all the logic. Another is controller does all the logic and model is just something like class with properties that is mapped to DB. Question 3: Where should i draw the line between this extremes? How to balance? Thanks, Andrey

    Read the article

  • Integrating ASP.NET MVC 3 into existing upgraded ASP.NET 4 Web Forms applications

    - by SAMIR BHOGAYTA
    http://www.hanselman.com/blog/IntegratingASPNETMVC3IntoExistingUpgradedASPNET4WebFormsApplications.aspx As per above article I follow the steps to integrate WebApp with MVC application. I am successfully integrated MVC project into WebApp(C#) and also VB.NET MVC and VB.NET WebApp also I am able to successfully integrated. The problem is If I choose WebApp as VB.NET project, and integrated with C# MVC project. In this case the request is not routing to corresponding MVC files. What could be the reason not routing to MVC. Do we need to plug some extra dlls?

    Read the article

  • Using GridView and DetailsView in ASP.NET MVC - Part 1

    - by bipinjoshi
    For any beginner in ASP.NET MVC the first disappointment is possibly the lack of any server controls. ASP.NET MVC divides the entire processing logic into three distinct parts namely model, view and controller. In the process views (that represent UI under MVC architecture) need to sacrifice three important features of web forms viz. Postbacks, ViewState and rich event model. Though server controls are not a recommended choice under ASP.NET MVC there are situations where you may need to use server controls. In this two part article I am going to explain, as an example, how GridView and DetailsView can be used in ASP.NET MVC without breaking the MVC pattern.http://www.bipinjoshi.net/articles/59b91531-3fb2-4504-84a4-9f52e2d65c20.aspx 

    Read the article

  • Testing the context in asp.net mvc

    - by user252160
    I got pretty experienced with testing controllers, my question here is though, aren't we supposed to test the data context as well, and how ? I mean, there are a lot of relationships and constraints coming from the DB that simply testing controllers does not cover. On the other hand, testing against the DB is not considered a good practice - what then ? Simply testing without db.SubmitChanges() or what ?

    Read the article

  • Announcing ASP.NET MVC 3 (Release Candidate 2)

    - by ScottGu
    Earlier today the ASP.NET team shipped the final release candidate (RC2) for ASP.NET MVC 3.  You can download and install it here. Almost there… Today’s RC2 release is the near-final release of ASP.NET MVC 3, and is a true “release candidate” in that we are hoping to not make any more code changes with it.  We are publishing it today so that people can do final testing with it, let us know if they find any last minute “showstoppers”, and start updating their apps to use it.  We will officially ship the final ASP.NET MVC 3 “RTM” build in January. Works with both VS 2010 and VS 2010 SP1 Beta Today’s ASP.NET MVC 3 RC2 release works with both the shipping version of Visual Studio 2010 / Visual Web Developer 2010 Express, as well as the newly released VS 2010 SP1 Beta.  This means that you do not need to install VS 2010 SP1 (or the SP1 beta) in order to use ASP.NET MVC 3.  It works just fine with the shipping Visual Studio 2010.  I’ll do a blog post next week, though, about some of the nice additional feature goodies that come with VS 2010 SP1 (including IIS Express and SQL CE support within VS) which make the dev experience for both ASP.NET Web Forms and ASP.NET MVC even better. Bugs and Perf Fixes Today’s ASP.NET MVC 3 RC2 build contains many bug fixes and performance optimizations.  Our latest performance tests indicate that ASP.NET MVC 3 is now faster than ASP.NET MVC 2, and that existing ASP.NET MVC applications will experience a slight performance increase when updated to run using ASP.NET MVC 3. Final Tweaks and Fit-N-Finish In addition to bug fixes and performance optimizations, today’s RC2 build contains a number of last-minute feature tweaks and “fit-n-finish” changes for the new ASP.NET MVC 3 features.  The feedback and suggestions we’ve received during the public previews has been invaluable in guiding these final tweaks, and we really appreciate people’s support in sending this feedback our way.  Below is a short-list of some of the feature changes/tweaks made between last month’s ASP.NET MVC 3 RC release and today’s ASP.NET MVC 3 RC2 release: jQuery updates and addition of jQuery UI The default ASP.NET MVC 3 project templates have been updated to include jQuery 1.4.4 and jQuery Validation 1.7.  We are also excited to announce today that we are including jQuery UI within our default ASP.NET project templates going forward.  jQuery UI provides a powerful set of additional UI widgets and capabilities.  It will be added by default to your project’s \scripts folder when you create new ASP.NET MVC 3 projects. Improved View Scaffolding The T4 templates used for scaffolding views with the Add-View dialog now generates views that use Html.EditorFor instead of helpers such as Html.TextBoxFor. This change enables you to optionally annotate models with metadata (using data annotation attributes) to better customize the output of your UI at runtime. The Add View scaffolding also supports improved detection and usage of primary key information on models (including support for naming conventions like ID, ProductID, etc).  For example: the Add View dialog box uses this information to ensure that the primary key value is not scaffold as an editable form field, and that links between views are auto-generated correctly with primary key information. The default Edit and Create templates also now include references to the jQuery scripts needed for client validation.  Scaffold form views now support client-side validation by default (no extra steps required).  Client-side validation with ASP.NET MVC 3 is also done using an unobtrusive javascript approach – making pages fast and clean. [ControllerSessionState] –> [SessionState] ASP.NET MVC 3 adds support for session-less controllers.  With the initial RC you used a [ControllerSessionState] attribute to specify this.  We shortened this in RC2 to just be [SessionState]: Note that in addition to turning off session state, you can also set it to be read-only (which is useful for webfarm scenarios where you are reading but not updating session state on a particular request). [SkipRequestValidation] –> [AllowHtml] ASP.NET MVC includes built-in support to protect against HTML and Cross-Site Script Injection Attacks, and will throw an error by default if someone tries to post HTML content as input.  Developers need to explicitly indicate that this is allowed (and that they’ve hopefully built their app to securely support it) in order to enable it. With ASP.NET MVC 3, we are also now supporting a new attribute that you can apply to properties of models/viewmodels to indicate that HTML input is enabled, which enables much more granular protection in a DRY way.  In last month’s RC release this attribute was named [SkipRequestValidation].  With RC2 we renamed it to [AllowHtml] to make it more intuitive: Setting the above [AllowHtml] attribute on a model/viewmodel will cause ASP.NET MVC 3 to turn off HTML injection protection when model binding just that property. Html.Raw() helper method The new Razor view engine introduced with ASP.NET MVC 3 automatically HTML encodes output by default.  This helps provide an additional level of protection against HTML and Script injection attacks. With RC2 we are adding a Html.Raw() helper method that you can use to explicitly indicate that you do not want to HTML encode your output, and instead want to render the content “as-is”: ViewModel/View –> ViewBag ASP.NET MVC has (since V1) supported a ViewData[] dictionary within Controllers and Views that enables developers to pass information from a Controller to a View in a late-bound way.  This approach can be used instead of, or in combination with, a strongly-typed model class.  The below code demonstrates a common use case – where a strongly typed Product model is passed to the view in addition to two late-bound variables via the ViewData[] dictionary: With ASP.NET MVC 3 we are introducing a new API that takes advantage of the dynamic type support within .NET 4 to set/retrieve these values.  It allows you to use standard “dot” notation to specify any number of additional variables to be passed, and does not require that you create a strongly-typed class to do so.  With earlier previews of ASP.NET MVC 3 we exposed this API using a dynamic property called “ViewModel” on the Controller base class, and with a dynamic property called “View” within view templates.  A lot of people found the fact that there were two different names confusing, and several also said that using the name ViewModel was confusing in this context – since often you create strongly-typed ViewModel classes in ASP.NET MVC, and they do not use this API.  With RC2 we are exposing a dynamic property that has the same name – ViewBag – within both Controllers and Views.  It is a dynamic collection that allows you to pass additional bits of data from your controller to your view template to help generate a response.  Below is an example of how we could use it to pass a time-stamp message as well as a list of all categories to our view template: Below is an example of how our view template (which is strongly-typed to expect a Product class as its model) can use the two extra bits of information we passed in our ViewBag to generate the response.  In particular, notice how we are using the list of categories passed in the dynamic ViewBag collection to generate a dropdownlist of friendly category names to help set the CategoryID property of our Product object.  The above Controller/View combination will then generate an HTML response like below.    Output Caching Improvements ASP.NET MVC 3’s output caching system no longer requires you to specify a VaryByParam property when declaring an [OutputCache] attribute on a Controller action method.  MVC3 now automatically varies the output cached entries when you have explicit parameters on your action method – allowing you to cleanly enable output caching on actions using code like below: In addition to supporting full page output caching, ASP.NET MVC 3 also supports partial-page caching – which allows you to cache a region of output and re-use it across multiple requests or controllers.  The [OutputCache] behavior for partial-page caching was updated with RC2 so that sub-content cached entries are varied based on input parameters as opposed to the URL structure of the top-level request – which makes caching scenarios both easier and more powerful than the behavior in the previous RC. @model declaration does not add whitespace In earlier previews, the strongly-typed @model declaration at the top of a Razor view added a blank line to the rendered HTML output. This has been fixed so that the declaration does not introduce whitespace. Changed "Html.ValidationMessage" Method to Display the First Useful Error Message The behavior of the Html.ValidationMessage() helper was updated to show the first useful error message instead of simply displaying the first error. During model binding, the ModelState dictionary can be populated from multiple sources with error messages about the property, including from the model itself (if it implements IValidatableObject), from validation attributes applied to the property, and from exceptions thrown while the property is being accessed. When the Html.ValidationMessage() method displays a validation message, it now skips model-state entries that include an exception, because these are generally not intended for the end user. Instead, the method looks for the first validation message that is not associated with an exception and displays that message. If no such message is found, it defaults to a generic error message that is associated with the first exception. RemoteAttribute “Fields” -> “AdditionalFields” ASP.NET MVC 3 includes built-in remote validation support with its validation infrastructure.  This means that the client-side validation script library used by ASP.NET MVC 3 can automatically call back to controllers you expose on the server to determine whether an input element is indeed valid as the user is editing the form (allowing you to provide real-time validation updates). You can accomplish this by decorating a model/viewmodel property with a [Remote] attribute that specifies the controller/action that should be invoked to remotely validate it.  With the RC this attribute had a “Fields” property that could be used to specify additional input elements that should be sent from the client to the server to help with the validation logic.  To improve the clarity of what this property does we have renamed it to “AdditionalFields” with today’s RC2 release. ViewResult.Model and ViewResult.ViewBag Properties The ViewResult class now exposes both a “Model” and “ViewBag” property off of it.  This makes it easier to unit test Controllers that return views, and avoids you having to access the Model via the ViewResult.ViewData.Model property. Installation Notes You can download and install the ASP.NET MVC 3 RC2 build here.  It can be installed on top of the previous ASP.NET MVC 3 RC release (it should just replace the bits as part of its setup). The one component that will not be updated by the above setup (if you already have it installed) is the NuGet Package Manager.  If you already have NuGet installed, please go to the Visual Studio Extensions Manager (via the Tools –> Extensions menu option) and click on the “Updates” tab.  You should see NuGet listed there – please click the “Update” button next to it to have VS update the extension to today’s release. If you do not have NuGet installed (and did not install the ASP.NET MVC RC build), then NuGet will be installed as part of your ASP.NET MVC 3 setup, and you do not need to take any additional steps to make it work. Summary We are really close to the final ASP.NET MVC 3 release, and will deliver the final “RTM” build of it next month.  It has been only a little over 7 months since ASP.NET MVC 2 shipped, and I’m pretty amazed by the huge number of new features, improvements, and refinements that the team has been able to add with this release (Razor, Unobtrusive JavaScript, NuGet, Dependency Injection, Output Caching, and a lot, lot more).  I’ll be doing a number of blog posts over the next few weeks talking about many of them in more depth. Hope this helps, Scott P.S. In addition to blogging, I am also now using Twitter for quick updates and to share links. Follow me at: twitter.com/scottgu

    Read the article

  • Mock Objects for Unit Testing

    - by user9009
    Hello How often QA engineers are responsible for developing Mock Objects for Unit Testing. So dealing with Mock Objects is just developer job ?. The reason i ask is i'm interested in QA as my career and am learning tools like JUnit , TestNG and couple of frameworks. I just want to know until what level of unit testing is done by developer and from what point QA engineer takes over testing for better test coverage ? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Development processes, the use of version control, and unit-testing

    - by ct01
    Preface I've worked at quite a few "flat" organizations in my time. Most of the version control policy/process has been "only commit after it's been tested". We were constantly committing at each place to "trunk" (cvs/svn). The same was true with unit-testing - it's always been a "we need to do this" mentality but it never really materializes in a substantive form b/c there is no institutional knowledge base to do it - no mentorship. Version Control The emphasis for version control management at one place was a very strict protocol for commit messages (format & content). The other places let employees just do "whatever". The branching, tagging, committing, rolling back, and merging aspect of things was always ill defined and almost never used. This sort of seems to leave the version control system in the position of being a fancy file-storage mechanism with a meta-data component that never really gets accessed/utilized. (The same was true for unit testing and committing code to the source tree) Unit tests It seems there's a prevailing "we must/should do this" mentality in most places I've worked. As a policy or standard operating procedure it never gets implemented because there seems to be a very ill-defined understanding about what that means, what is going to be tested, and how to do it. Summary It seems most places I've been to think version control and unit testing is "important" b/c the trendy trade journals say it is but, if there's very little mentorship to use these tools or any real business policies, then the full power of version control/unit testing is never really expressed. So grunts, like myself, never really have a complete understanding of the point beyond that "it's a good thing" and "we should do it". Question I was wondering if there are blogs, books, white-papers, or online journals about what one could call the business process or "standard operating procedures" or uses cases for version control and unit testing? I want to know more than the trade journals tell me and get serious about doing these things. PS: @Henrik Hansen had a great comment about the lack of definition for the question. I'm not interested in a specific unit-testing/versioning product or methodology (like, XP) - my interest is more about work-flow at the individual team/developer level than evangelism. This is more-or-less a by product of the management situation I've operated under more than a lack of reading software engineering books or magazines about development processes. A lot of what I've seen/read is more marketing oriented material than any specifically enumerated description of "well, this is how our shop operates".

    Read the article

  • Advancing Code Review and Unit Testing Practice

    - by Graviton
    As a team lead managing a group of developers with no experience ( and see no need) in code review and unit testing, how can you advance code review and unit testing practice? How are you going to create a way so that code review and unit testing to naturally fit into the developer's flow? One of the resistance of these two areas is that "we are always tight on dateline, so no time for code review and unit testing". Another resistance for code review is that we currently don't know how to do it. Should we review the code upon every check-in, or review the code at a specified date?

    Read the article

  • unit testing variable state explicit tests in dynamically typed languages

    - by kris welsh
    I have heard that a desirable quality of unit tests is that they test for each scenario independently. I realised whilst writing tests today that when you compare a variable with another value in a statement like: assertEquals("foo", otherObject.stringFoo); You are really testing three things: The variable you are testing exists and is within scope. The variable you are testing is the expected type. The variable you are testing's value is what you expect it to be. Which to me raises the question of whether you should test for each of these implicitly so that a test fail would occur on the specific line that tests for that problem: assertTrue(stringFoo); assertTrue(stringFoo.typeOf() == "String"); assertEquals("foo", otherObject.stringFoo); For example if the variable was an integer instead of a string the test case failure would be on line 2 which would give you more feedback on what went wrong. Should you test for this kind of thing explicitly or am i overthinking this?

    Read the article

  • Testing loses its effectiveness if all programmers don't use them

    - by Jeff O
    Let's assume you are convinced that the extra time spent unit testing has merit and improves production. Does that still hold up when everyone working on the same code doesn't use them? This question makes me wonder if fixing tests that everyone doesn't use is a waste of time. If you correct a test so the new code will pass, you're assuming the new code is correct. The person updating the test better have a firm understanding of the reasoning behind the code change and decide if the test or the new code needs to be fixed. This much inconsistency in a team when it comes to testing is probably an indication of other problems as well. There is a certain amount of risk involved that someone else on the team will alter code that is covered by testing. Is this the point where testing becomes counter-productive?

    Read the article

  • Is verification and validation part of testing process?

    - by user970696
    Based on many sources I do not believe the simple definition that aim of testing is to find as many bugs as possible - we test to ensure that it works or that it does not. E.g. followint are goals of testing form ISTQB: Determine that (software products) satisfy specified requirements ( I think its verificication) Demonstrate that (software products) are fit for purpose (I think that is validation) Detect defects I would agree that testing is verification, validation and defect detection. Is that correct?

    Read the article

  • JUnit Testing in Multithread Application

    - by e2bady
    This is a problem me and my team faces in almost all of the projects. Testing certain parts of the application with JUnit is not easy and you need to start early and to stick to it, but that's not the question I'm asking. The actual problem is that with n-Threads, locking, possible exceptions within the threads and shared objects the task of testing is not as simple as testing the class, but testing them under endless possible situations within threading. To be more precise, let me tell you about the design of one of our applications: When a user makes a request several threads are started that each analyse a part of the data to complete the analysis, these threads run a certain time depending on the size of the chunk of data (which are endless and of uncertain quality) to analyse, or they may fail if the data was insufficient/lacking quality. After each completed its analysis they call upon a handler which decides after each thread terminates if the collected analysis-data is sufficient to deliver an answer to the request. All of these analysers share certain parts of the applications (some parts because the instances are very big and only a certain number can be loaded into memory and those instances are reusable, some parts because they have a standing connection, where connecting takes time, ex.gr. sql connections) so locking is very common (done with reentrant-locks). While the applications runs very efficient and fast, it's not very easy to test it under real-world conditions. What we do right now is test each class and it's predefined conditions, but there are no automated tests for interlocking and synchronization, which in my opionion is not very good for quality insurances. Given this example how would you handle testing the threading, interlocking and synchronization?

    Read the article

  • Database unit testing is now available for SSDT

    - by jamiet
    Good news was announced yesterday for those that are using SSDT and want to write unit tests, unit testing functionality is now available. The announcement was made on the SSDT team blog in post Available Today: SSDT—December 2012. Here are a few thoughts about this news. Firstly, there seems to be a general impression that database unit testing was not previously available for SSDT – that’s not entirely true. Database unit testing was most recently delivered in Visual Studio 2010 and any database unit tests written therein work perfectly well against SQL Server databases created using SSDT (why wouldn’t they – its just a database after all). In other words, if you’re running SSDT inside Visual Studio 2010 then you could carry on freely writing database unit tests; some of the tight integration between the two (e.g. right-click on an object in SQL Server Object Explorer and choose to create a unit test) was not there – but I’ve never found that to be a problem. I am currently working on a project that uses SSDT for database development and have been happily running VS2010 database unit tests for a few months now. All that being said, delivery of database unit testing for SSDT is now with us and that is good news, not least because we now have the ability to create unit tests in VS2012. We also get tight integration with SSDT itself, the like of which I mentioned above. Having now had a look at the new features I was delighted to find that one of my big complaints about database unit testing has been solved. As I reported here on Connect a refactor operation would cause unit test code to get completely mangled. See here the before and after from such an operation: SELECT    * FROM    bi.ProcessMessageLog pml INNER JOIN bi.[LogMessageType] lmt     ON    pml.[LogMessageTypeId] = lmt.[LogMessageTypeId] WHERE    pml.[LogMessage] = 'Ski[LogMessageTypeName]of message: IApplicationCanceled' AND        lmt.[LogMessageType] = 'Warning'; which is obviously not ideal. Thankfully that seems to have been solved with this latest release. One disappointment about this new release is that the process for running tests as part of a CI build has not changed from the horrendously complicated process required previously. Check out my blog post Setting up database unit testing as part of a Continuous Integration build process [VS2010 DB Tools - Datadude] for instructions on how to do it. In that blog post I describe it as “fiddly” – I was being kind when I said that! @Jamiet

    Read the article

  • Mock Objects for Testing - Test Automation Engineer Perspective

    - by user9009
    Hello How often QA engineers are responsible for developing Mock Objects for Unit Testing. So dealing with Mock Objects is just developer job ?. The reason i ask is i'm interested in QA as my career and am learning tools like JUnit , TestNG and couple of frameworks. I just want to know until what level of unit testing is done by developer and from what point QA engineer takes over testing for better test coverage ? Thanks Edit : Based on the answers below am providing more details about what QA i was referring to . I'm interested in more of Test Automation rather than simple QA involved in record and play of script. So Test Automation engineers are responsible for developing frameworks ? or do they have a team of developers dedicated in Framework development ? Yes i was asking about usage of Mock Objects for testing from Test Automation engineer perspective.

    Read the article

  • CppUnit for unit-testing executable files?

    - by hagubear
    I am not sure if anyone has done it. I am trying to do something that is in general, uncommon i.e. unit-testing executable (Windows) or ELFs (Linux). I know that CppUnit provides a good unit testing facility, but I have never used it for unit-testing (used UnitTest++). I hear rumours that you can unit-test executables too. Does anyone have the experience in this? A relevant post regarding the philosophy of it was here

    Read the article

  • Scenario to illustrate how unit testing leads to better design

    - by Cocowalla
    For an internal training session, I'm trying to come up with a simple scenario that illustrates how unit testing leads to better design, by forcing you to think about things like coupling before you start coding. The idea is that I get the participants to code something first, without considering unit testing, then we do it again, but considering unit testing. Hopefully the code produced second time round should be more decoupled and maintainable. I'm struggling to come up with a scenario that can be coded quickly, yet can still demonstrate how unit testing can lead to better overall design.

    Read the article

  • What is the aim of software testing?

    - by user970696
    Having read many books, there is a basic contradiction: Some say, "the goal of testing is to find bugs" while other say "the goal of the testing is to equalize the quality of the product", meaning that bugs are its by-products. I would also agree that if testing would be aimed primarily on a bug hunt, who would do the actual verification and actually provided the information, that the software is ready? Even e.g. Kaner changed his original definiton of testing goal from bug hunting to quality assesement provision but I still cannot see the clear difference. I percieve both as equally important. I can verify software by its specification to make sure it works and in that case, bugs found are just by products. But also I perform tests just to brake things. Also what definition is more accurate?

    Read the article

  • Code testing practice

    - by Robin Castlin
    So now I have come to the conclusion like many others that having some way of constantly testing your code is good practice since it enables fewer people to be involved (colleges and customers alike) by simply knowing what's wrong before someone else finds out the hard way. I've heard and read some about Unit Testing and understand what it's supposed to do and all. The there are so many different types of bugs. It can be everything from web browser not being able not being able to send correct values, javascript failing, a global function messing up a piece of code somewhere to a change that looked good when testing it out but fails in some special case which was hard to anticipate. My simply finding these errors I learn to rarely repeat them again, but there seems to always be new bugs to be found and learnt from. I would guess maybe the best practice would be to run every page and it's functions a couple of times, witness the result and repeat this in Firefox, Chrome and Internet Explorer (and all smartphones apparently) to make sure it works as intended. However this would take quite some time to do consider I don't work with patches/versions and do little fixes here and there a couple of times per week. What I prefer would be some kind of page I can just load that tests as much things as possible to make sure the site works as intended. Basicly just run a lot of cURL's with POST-values and see if I get expected result. But how would I preferably not increase the IDs of every mysql rows if I delete these testing rows? It feels silly to be on ID 1000 with maybe 50 rows in total. If I could build a new project from scratch I would probably implement some kind of smooth way to return a "TRUE" on testing instead of the actual page. But this solution would for the moment being have to be passed on existing projects. My question What would you recommend to be the best way to test my site to make sure that existing functions does their job upon editing the code? Should I consider to implement a lot of edits first, then test manually the entire code to make sure it still works? Is there any nice way of testing codes without "hurting" the ID columns? Extra thoughs Would it be a good idea to associate all of my files to the different parts of my site which they affect? For instance if I edit home.php I will through documentation test if my homepage's start works as intended since it's the only part of my site it should affect.

    Read the article

  • REST for ASP.NET MVC included in MVC 2?

    - by Mike Hodnick
    Are the REST for ASP.NET MVC bits automatically included with MVC 2, or do you need to download/install/use the REST for ASP.NET MVC bits separately? Specifically, I'm referring to the REST for ASP.NET MVC download here: http://aspnet.codeplex.com/releases/view/24471#DownloadId=79561 I want to use REST for ASP.NET MVC for the automatic json/xml serialization based on the incoming request's accepted content type. I'm not really finding any info about MVC2's ability to do this out of the "box".

    Read the article

  • asp.net mvc custom model binder

    - by mike
    pleas help guys, my custom model binder which has been working perfectly has starting giving me errors details below An item with the same key has already been added. 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.ArgumentException: An item with the same key has already been added. Source Error: Line 31: { Line 32: string key = bindingContext.ModelName; Line 33: var doc = base.BindModel(controllerContext, bindingContext) as Document; Line 34: Line 35: // DoBasicValidation(bindingContext, doc); Source File: C:\Users\Bich Vu\Documents\Visual Studio 2008\Projects\PitchPortal\PitchPortal.Web\Binders\DocumentModelBinder.cs Line: 33 Stack Trace: [ArgumentException: An item with the same key has already been added.] System.ThrowHelper.ThrowArgumentException(ExceptionResource resource) +51 System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary2.Insert(TKey key, TValue value, Boolean add) +7462172 System.Linq.Enumerable.ToDictionary(IEnumerable1 source, Func2 keySelector, Func2 elementSelector, IEqualityComparer1 comparer) +270 System.Linq.Enumerable.ToDictionary(IEnumerable1 source, Func2 keySelector, IEqualityComparer1 comparer) +102 System.Web.Mvc.ModelBindingContext.get_PropertyMetadata() +157 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindProperty(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext, PropertyDescriptor propertyDescriptor) +158 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindProperties(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) +90 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindComplexElementalModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext, Object model) +50 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindComplexModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) +1048 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) +280 PitchPortal.Web.Binders.documentModelBinder.BindModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) in C:\Users\Bich Vu\Documents\Visual Studio 2008\Projects\PitchPortal\PitchPortal.Web\Binders\DocumentModelBinder.cs:33 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.GetParameterValue(ControllerContext controllerContext, ParameterDescriptor parameterDescriptor) +257 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.GetParameterValues(ControllerContext controllerContext, ActionDescriptor actionDescriptor) +109 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeAction(ControllerContext controllerContext, String actionName) +314 System.Web.Mvc.Controller.ExecuteCore() +105 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerBase.Execute(RequestContext requestContext) +39 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerBase.System.Web.Mvc.IController.Execute(RequestContext requestContext) +7 System.Web.Mvc.<c_DisplayClass8.b_4() +34 System.Web.Mvc.Async.<c_DisplayClass1.b_0() +21 System.Web.Mvc.Async.<c_DisplayClass81.b_7(IAsyncResult _) +12 System.Web.Mvc.Async.WrappedAsyncResult1.End() +59 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.EndProcessRequest(IAsyncResult asyncResult) +44 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.System.Web.IHttpAsyncHandler.EndProcessRequest(IAsyncResult result) +7 System.Web.CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication.IExecutionStep.Execute() +8677678 System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously) +155 any ideas guys? Thanks

    Read the article

  • asp.net mvc custom model binder

    - by mike
    pleas help guys, my custom model binder which has been working perfectly has starting giving me errors details below An item with the same key has already been added. 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.ArgumentException: An item with the same key has already been added. Source Error: Line 31: { Line 32: string key = bindingContext.ModelName; Line 33: var doc = base.BindModel(controllerContext, bindingContext) as Document; Line 34: Line 35: // DoBasicValidation(bindingContext, doc); Source File: C:\Users\Bich Vu\Documents\Visual Studio 2008\Projects\PitchPortal\PitchPortal.Web\Binders\DocumentModelBinder.cs Line: 33 Stack Trace: [ArgumentException: An item with the same key has already been added.] System.ThrowHelper.ThrowArgumentException(ExceptionResource resource) +51 System.Collections.Generic.Dictionary2.Insert(TKey key, TValue value, Boolean add) +7462172 System.Linq.Enumerable.ToDictionary(IEnumerable1 source, Func2 keySelector, Func2 elementSelector, IEqualityComparer1 comparer) +270 System.Linq.Enumerable.ToDictionary(IEnumerable1 source, Func2 keySelector, IEqualityComparer1 comparer) +102 System.Web.Mvc.ModelBindingContext.get_PropertyMetadata() +157 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindProperty(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext, PropertyDescriptor propertyDescriptor) +158 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindProperties(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) +90 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindComplexElementalModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext, Object model) +50 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindComplexModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) +1048 System.Web.Mvc.DefaultModelBinder.BindModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) +280 PitchPortal.Web.Binders.documentModelBinder.BindModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext) in C:\Users\Bich Vu\Documents\Visual Studio 2008\Projects\PitchPortal\PitchPortal.Web\Binders\DocumentModelBinder.cs:33 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.GetParameterValue(ControllerContext controllerContext, ParameterDescriptor parameterDescriptor) +257 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.GetParameterValues(ControllerContext controllerContext, ActionDescriptor actionDescriptor) +109 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker.InvokeAction(ControllerContext controllerContext, String actionName) +314 System.Web.Mvc.Controller.ExecuteCore() +105 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerBase.Execute(RequestContext requestContext) +39 System.Web.Mvc.ControllerBase.System.Web.Mvc.IController.Execute(RequestContext requestContext) +7 System.Web.Mvc.<c_DisplayClass8.b_4() +34 System.Web.Mvc.Async.<c_DisplayClass1.b_0() +21 System.Web.Mvc.Async.<c__DisplayClass81.<BeginSynchronous>b__7(IAsyncResult _) +12 System.Web.Mvc.Async.WrappedAsyncResult1.End() +59 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.EndProcessRequest(IAsyncResult asyncResult) +44 System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler.System.Web.IHttpAsyncHandler.EndProcessRequest(IAsyncResult result) +7 System.Web.CallHandlerExecutionStep.System.Web.HttpApplication.IExecutionStep.Execute() +8677678 System.Web.HttpApplication.ExecuteStep(IExecutionStep step, Boolean& completedSynchronously) +155 any ideas guys? Thanks

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 3 Hosting :: Error Handling and CustomErrors in ASP.NET MVC 3 Framework

    - by C. Miller
    So, what else is new in MVC 3? MVC 3 now has a GlobalFilterCollection that is automatically populated with a HandleErrorAttribute. This default FilterAttribute brings with it a new way of handling errors in your web applications. In short, you can now handle errors inside of the MVC pipeline. What does that mean? This gives you direct programmatic control over handling your 500 errors in the same way that ASP.NET and CustomErrors give you configurable control of handling your HTTP error codes. How does that work out? Think of it as a routing table specifically for your Exceptions, it's pretty sweet! Global Filters The new Global.asax file now has a RegisterGlobalFilters method that is used to add filters to the new GlobalFilterCollection, statically located at System.Web.Mvc.GlobalFilter.Filters. By default this method adds one filter, the HandleErrorAttribute. public class MvcApplication : System.Web.HttpApplication {     public static void RegisterGlobalFilters(GlobalFilterCollection filters)     {         filters.Add(new HandleErrorAttribute());     } HandleErrorAttributes The HandleErrorAttribute is pretty simple in concept: MVC has already adjusted us to using Filter attributes for our AcceptVerbs and RequiresAuthorization, now we are going to use them for (as the name implies) error handling, and we are going to do so on a (also as the name implies) global scale. The HandleErrorAttribute has properties for ExceptionType, View, and Master. The ExceptionType allows you to specify what exception that attribute should handle. The View allows you to specify which error view (page) you want it to redirect to. Last but not least, the Master allows you to control which master page (or as Razor refers to them, Layout) you want to render with, even if that means overriding the default layout specified in the view itself. public class MvcApplication : System.Web.HttpApplication {     public static void RegisterGlobalFilters(GlobalFilterCollection filters)     {         filters.Add(new HandleErrorAttribute         {             ExceptionType = typeof(DbException),             // DbError.cshtml is a view in the Shared folder.             View = "DbError",             Order = 2         });         filters.Add(new HandleErrorAttribute());     }Error Views All of your views still work like they did in the previous version of MVC (except of course that they can now use the Razor engine). However, a view that is used to render an error can not have a specified model! This is because they already have a model, and that is System.Web.Mvc.HandleErrorInfo @model System.Web.Mvc.HandleErrorInfo           @{     ViewBag.Title = "DbError"; } <h2>A Database Error Has Occurred</h2> @if (Model != null) {     <p>@Model.Exception.GetType().Name<br />     thrown in @Model.ControllerName @Model.ActionName</p> }Errors Outside of the MVC Pipeline The HandleErrorAttribute will only handle errors that happen inside of the MVC pipeline, better known as 500 errors. Errors outside of the MVC pipeline are still handled the way they have always been with ASP.NET. You turn on custom errors, specify error codes and paths to error pages, etc. It is important to remember that these will happen for anything and everything outside of what the HandleErrorAttribute handles. Also, these will happen whenever an error is not handled with the HandleErrorAttribute from inside of the pipeline. <system.web>  <customErrors mode="On" defaultRedirect="~/error">     <error statusCode="404" redirect="~/error/notfound"></error>  </customErrors>Sample Controllers public class ExampleController : Controller {     public ActionResult Exception()     {         throw new ArgumentNullException();     }     public ActionResult Db()     {         // Inherits from DbException         throw new MyDbException();     } } public class ErrorController : Controller {     public ActionResult Index()     {         return View();     }     public ActionResult NotFound()     {         return View();     } } Putting It All Together If we have all the code above included in our MVC 3 project, here is how the following scenario's will play out: 1.       A controller action throws an Exception. You will remain on the current page and the global HandleErrorAttributes will render the Error view. 2.       A controller action throws any type of DbException. You will remain on the current page and the global HandleErrorAttributes will render the DbError view. 3.       Go to a non-existent page. You will be redirect to the Error controller's NotFound action by the CustomErrors configuration for HTTP StatusCode 404. But don't take my word for it, download the sample project and try it yourself. Three Important Lessons Learned For the most part this is all pretty straight forward, but there are a few gotcha's that you should remember to watch out for: 1) Error views have models, but they must be of type HandleErrorInfo. It is confusing at first to think that you can't control the M in an MVC page, but it's for a good reason. Errors can come from any action in any controller, and no redirect is taking place, so the view engine is just going to render an error view with the only data it has: The HandleError Info model. Do not try to set the model on your error page or pass in a different object through a controller action, it will just blow up and cause a second exception after your first exception! 2) When the HandleErrorAttribute renders a page, it does not pass through a controller or an action. The standard web.config CustomErrors literally redirect a failed request to a new page. The HandleErrorAttribute is just rendering a view, so it is not going to pass through a controller action. But that's ok! Remember, a controller's job is to get the model for a view, but an error already has a model ready to give to the view, thus there is no need to pass through a controller. That being said, the normal ASP.NET custom errors still need to route through controllers. So if you want to share an error page between the HandleErrorAttribute and your web.config redirects, you will need to create a controller action and route for it. But then when you render that error view from your action, you can only use the HandlerErrorInfo model or ViewData dictionary to populate your page. 3) The HandleErrorAttribute obeys if CustomErrors are on or off, but does not use their redirects. If you turn CustomErrors off in your web.config, the HandleErrorAttributes will stop handling errors. However, that is the only configuration these two mechanisms share. The HandleErrorAttribute will not use your defaultRedirect property, or any other errors registered with customer errors. In Summary The HandleErrorAttribute is for displaying 500 errors that were caused by exceptions inside of the MVC pipeline. The custom errors are for redirecting from error pages caused by other HTTP codes.

    Read the article

  • Performance Testing Versus Unit Testing

    - by Mystagogue
    I'm reading Osherove's "The Art of Unit Testing," and though I've not yet seen him say anything about performance testing, two thoughts still cross my mind: Performance tests generally can't be unit tests, because performance tests generally need to run for long periods of time. Performance tests generally can't be unit tests, because performance issues too often manifest at an integration or system level (or at least the logic of a single unit test needed to re-create the performance of the integration environment would be too involved to be a unit test). Particularly for the first reason stated above, I doubt it makes sense for performance tests to be handled by a unit testing framework (such as NUnit). My question is: do my findings / leanings correspond with the thoughts of the community?

    Read the article

  • How to learn ASP.NET MVC without learning ASP.NET Web forms

    - by Naif
    First of all, I am not a web developer but I can say that I understand in general the difference between PHP, ASP.NET, etc. I have played a little with ASP.NET and C# as well, however, I didn't continue the learning path. Now I'd like to learn ASP.NET MVC but there is no a book for a beginner in ASP.NET MVC so I had a look at the tutorials but it seems that I need to learn C# first and SQL Server and HTML, am I right? So please tell me how can I learn ASP.NET MVC directly (I mean without learning ASP.NET Web forms). What do I need to learn (You can assume that I am an absolute beginner). Update: It is true that i can find ASP.NET MVC tutorial that explain ASP.NET MVC, but I used to find ASP.NET web forms books that explain SQL and C# at the same time and take you step by step. In ASP.NET MVC I don't know how can I start! How can I learn SQL in its own and C# in its own and then combine them with ASP.NET MVC!

    Read the article

  • What are the benefits of Castle Monorail 3 over ASP.Net MVC?

    - by yorch
    I have been using Castle Monorail for some years now with great success, although I haven't bothered to update the version I'm using (2 or 3 year old). Now I'm making a decision on go to ASP.Net MVC 3 or update to the latest Castle version. I have been looking documentation on the newest version of Castle projects (specially Monorail), but there is really little or no info around (I may be wrong). Does someone knows what are the benefits/new features of version 3 over ASP.Net MVC3? Thanks!

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16  | Next Page >