Search Results

Search found 25123 results on 1005 pages for 'domain model'.

Page 98/1005 | < Previous Page | 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105  | Next Page >

• ssl multi domain website

  - by NetParis

  We need to secure a multi-langual web application with SSL (registration, login,..). However, this application is accessed by different domain names, exactly a domain name for each language (domainName.co.uk, domainName.fr, domainName.it and so on). We're looking for the simplest and cheapest solution. We don't want to purchase a certificate for each domain name. Some one has an idea ? the web server : IIS 6 Thanks

  Read the article

• Observing model changes with Cocoa Bindings and NSArrayController

  - by jbrennan

  I've got an NSArrayController bound to a mutable array in my controller, which manages an array of my model objects. The array controller is bound to my UI. It works well. Now I'm trying to manually observe when a value changes in my model in my controller class (basically I'm marking the changed model as "needsToSave" for later on, but there are a few other tasks I have when it changes). I've read up on KVO but I'm not entirely sure what I need to be observing... The NSArrayController? The array of objects? each model object itself? Confusion. Any pointers would be very helpful. Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• Using LLBL as Model in MVC

  - by Quentin J S

  I have settled on trying to use ASP.NET MVC but the first part I want to replace is the Model. I am using LLBL Pro for the model. I have a table called "Groups" that is a simple look up table. I want to take thhe results of the table and populate a list in MVC. Something that should be very simple... or so I thought.... I've tried all kinds of things as I was getting errors like: The model item passed into the dictionary is of type 'System.Collections.Generic.List1[glossary.EntityClasses.GroupEntity]', but this dictionary requires a model item of type 'System.Collections.Generic.IEnumerable1[glossary.CollectionClasses.GroupCollection]'. private GroupCollection gc = new GroupCollection(); public ActionResult Index() { gc.GetMulti(null); return View( gc.?????? ); } This is all I am trying to do, I've tried lots of variations, but my goal is simply to take the data and display it.

  Read the article

• Model Binding, a simple, simple question

  - by Paul Hatcherian

  I have a struct which works much like the System.Nullable type: public struct SpecialProperty<T> { public static implicit operator T(SpecialProperty<T> value) { return value.Value; } public static implicit operator SpecialProperty<T>(T value) { return new TrackChanges<T> { Value = value }; } T internalValue; public T Value { get { return internalValue; } set { internalValue = value; } } public override bool Equals(object other) { return Value.Equals(other); } public override int GetHashCode() { return Value.GetHashCode(); } public override string ToString() { return Value.ToString(); } } I'm trying to use it with ASP.NET MVC binding. Using the default customer model binder the property will always yield null. I can fix this by adding ".Value" to the end of every form input name, but I just want it to bind to the new type directly using some sort of custom model binder, but all the solutions I've tried seemed needlessly complex. I feel like I should be able to extend the default binder and with a few lines of code redirect the property binding to the entire model using implicit conversion. I don't quite get the binding paradigm of the default binder, but it seems really stuck on this distinction between the model and model properties. What is the simplest method to do this? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Prepopulating inlines based on the parent model in the Django Admin

  - by Alasdair

  I have two models, Event and Series, where each Event belongs to a Series. Most of the time, an Event's start_time is the same as its Series' default_time. Here's a stripped down version of the models. #models.py class Series(models.Model): name = models.CharField(max_length=50) default_time = models.TimeField() class Event(models.Model): name = models.CharField(max_length=50) date = models.DateField() start_time = models.TimeField() series = models.ForeignKey(Series) I use inlines in the admin application, so that I can edit all the Events for a Series at once. If a series has already been created, I want to prepopulate the start_time for each inline Event with the Series' default_time. So far, I have created a model admin form for Event, and used the initial option to prepopulate the time field with a fixed time. #admin.py ... import datetime class OEventInlineAdminForm(forms.ModelForm): start_time = forms.TimeField(initial=datetime.time(18,30,00)) class Meta: model = OEvent class EventInline(admin.TabularInline): form = EventInlineAdminForm model = Event class SeriesAdmin(admin.ModelAdmin): inlines = [EventInline,] I am not sure how to proceed from here. Is it possible to extend the code, so that the initial value for the start_time field is the Series' default_time?

  Read the article

• asp.net MVC should a View-Model Encapsulate Domain-Model?

  - by Myster

  Hi all I've see a lot of MVC examples where domain-objects are passed directly to views, this will work fine if your view is simple. The common alternative is to have a view-model which has all the same properties as your domain-model + any extra properties your view may need (such as 'confirmPassword'). Before doing too much reading and before discovering AutoMapper I started creating my own variant of view-model where the domain-object (or multiple domain objects) are simply properties of the view-model. Have I done a bad thing? What problems or benefits could be derived from this approach? Under what circumstances might this way of doing things work well?

  Read the article

• A PHP design pattern for the model part [PHP Zend Framework]

  - by Matthieu

  I have a PHP MVC application using Zend Framework. As presented in the quickstart, I use 3 layers for the model part : Model (business logic) Data mapper Table data gateway (or data access object, i.e. one class per SQL table) The model is UML designed and totally independent of the DB. My problem is : I can't have multiple instances of the same "instance/record". For example : if I get, for example, the user "Chuck Norris" with id=5, this will create a new model instance wich members will be filled by the data mapper (the data mapper query the table data gateway that query the DB). Then, if I change the name to "Duck Norras", don't save it in DB right away, and re-load the same user in another variable, I have "synchronisation" problems... (different instances for the same "record") Right now, I use the Multiton pattern : like Singleton, but multiple instances indexed by a key (wich is the user ID in our example). But this is complicating my developpement a lot, and my testings too. How to do it right ?

  Read the article

• Exposing model object using bindings in custom NSCell of NSTableView

  - by Hooligancat

  I am struggling trying to perform what I would think would be a relatively common task. I have an NSTableView that is bound to it's array via an NSArrayController. The array controller has it's content set to an NSMutableArray that contains one or more NSObject instances of a model class. What I don't know how to do is expose the model inside the NSCell subclass in a way that is bindings friendly. For the purpose of illustration, we'll say that the object model is a person consisting of a first name, last name, age and gender. Thus the model would appear something like this: @interface PersonModel : NSObject { NSString * firstName; NSString * lastName; NSString * gender; int * age; } Obviously the appropriate setters, getters init etc for the class. In my controller class I define an NSTableView, NSMutableArray and an NSArrayController: @interface ControllerClass : NSObject { IBOutlet NSTableView * myTableView; NSMutableArray * myPersonArray; IBOutlet NSArrayController * myPersonArrayController; } Using Interface Builder I can easily bind the model to the appropriate columns: myPersonArray --> myPersonArrayController --> table column binding This works fine. So I remove the extra columns, leaving one column hidden that is bound to the NSArrayController (this creates and keeps the association between each row and the NSArrayController) so that I am down to one visible column in my NSTableView and one hidden column. I create an NSCell subclass and put the appropriate drawing method to create the cell. In my awakeFromNib I establish the custom NSCell subclass: PersonModel * aCustomCell = [[[PersonModel alloc] init] autorelease]; [[myTableView tableColumnWithIdentifier:@"customCellColumn"] setDataCell:aCustomCell]; This, too, works fine from a drawing perspective. I get my custom cell showing up in the column and it repeats for every managed object in my array controller. If I add an object or remove an object from the array controller the table updates accordingly. However... I was under the impression that my PersonModel object would be available from within my NSCell subclass. But I don't know how to get to it. I don't want to set each NSCell using setters and getters because then I'm breaking the whole model concept by storing data in the NSCell instead of referencing it from the array controller. And yes I do need to have a custom NSCell, so having multiple columns is not an option. Where to from here? In addition to the Google and StackOverflow search, I've done the obligatory walk through on Apple's docs and don't seem to have found the answer. I have found a lot of references that beat around the bush but nothing involving an NSArrayController. The controller makes life very easy when binding to other elements of the model entity (such as a master/detail scenario). I have also found a lot of references (although no answers) when using Core Data, but Im not using Core Data. As per the norm, I'm very grateful for any assistance that can be offered!

  Read the article

• MVVM View Model DTOs

  - by Burt

  I have a WCF based application that uses the services to access repositories on the server side. I am passing DTOs from the server to the client and was wondering how best to make the DTOs part pf the view model. I have a workign example of just plain properties on the view model but was unsure how to deal with actual DTO objects and any possible conversion between the DTO and the Vview model properties.

  Read the article

• Making only a part of model field available in Django

  - by Hellnar

  Hello I have a such model: GENDER_CHOICES = ( ('M', 'Male'), ('F', 'Female') ) class Profile(models.Model): user = models.ForeignKey(User) gender = models.CharField(max_length=1, choices=GENDER_CHOICES) class FrontPage(models.Model): female = models.ForeignKey(User,related_name="female") male = models.ForeignKey(User,related_name="male") Once I attempt to add a new FrontPage object via the Admin page, I can select "Female" profiles for the male field of FrontPage, how can I restrict that? Thanks

  Read the article

• jQuery Validation addMethod - Check if same domain

  - by Ricky

  I'm trying to check whether a URL is from the same domain with jQuery Validation addMethod. Here's what i got so far, but it doesn't seem to be working: jQuery.validator.addMethod("domain", function(value, element) { return this.optional(element) || /^http:\/\/testsite.com/.test(value); }, "The URL doesn't match."); $("#url_form").validate({ rules: { url: { required: true, url: true, domain : true } } });

  Read the article

• django model Form. Include fields from related models

  - by Tom

  Hi. I have a model, called Student, which has some fields, and a OneToOne relationship with user (django.contrib.auth.User). class Student(models.Model): phone = models.CharField(max_length = 25 ) birthdate = models.DateField(null=True) gender = models.CharField(max_length=1,choices = GENDER_CHOICES) city = models.CharField(max_length = 50) personalInfo = models.TextField() user = models.OneToOneField(User,unique=True) Then, I have a ModelForm for that model class StudentForm (forms.ModelForm): class Meta: model = Student Using the fields attribute in class Meta, i've managed to show only some fields in a template. However, can I indicate which user fields to show? Something as: fields =('personalInfo','user.username') is currently not showing anything. Works with only StudentFields though/ Thanks in advance.

  Read the article

• How to customize pickle for django model objects

  - by muudscope

  I need to pickle a complex object that refers to django model objects. The standard pickling process stores a denormalized object in the pickle. So if the object changes on the database between pickling and unpickling, the model is now out of date. (I know this is true with in-memory objects too, but the pickling is a convenient time to address it.) So what I'd like is a way to not pickle the full django model object. Instead just store its class and id, and re-fetch the contents from the database on load. Can I specify a custom pickle method for this class? I'm happy to write a wrapper class around the django model to handle the lazy fetching from db, if there's a way to do the pickling.

  Read the article

• Referencing Entity from external data model - Core Data

  - by Ben Reeves

  I have a external library which includes a core data model, I would like to add a new entity to this model which has a relationship with one of the entities from the library. I know I could modify the original, but is there a way to without needing to pollute the library? I tried just creating a new model with an entity named the same, but that doesn't work: * Terminating app due to uncaught exception 'NSInvalidArgumentException', reason: 'Can't merge models with two different entities named 'Host''

  Read the article

• Alternate datasource for django model?

  - by slypete

  I'm trying to seamlessly integrate some legacy data into a django application. I would like to know if it's possible to use an alternate datasource for a django model. For example, can I contact a server to populate a list of a model? The server would not be SQL based at all. Instead it uses some proprietary tcp based protocol. Copying the data is not an option, as the legacy application will continue to be used for some time. Would a custom manager allow me to do this? This model should behave just like any other django model. It should even pluggable to the admin interface. What do you think? Thanks, Pete

  Read the article

• Active Directory authentication for Non-Domain users

  - by Murat

  I have a web application using windows authentication. I also want to authenticate non-domain users against AD. Can I have domain members can enter site directly, and non-members enter their domain username and password. How can I do this?

  Read the article

• Model associations

  - by Kalyan M

  I have two models Library and Book. In my Library model, I have an array - book_ids. The primary key of Book model is ID. How do I create a has_many :books relation in my library model? This is a legacy database we are using with rails. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Goolge App Engine authorization with Google Apps Domain

  - by Ron

  I have successfully followed the examples to gain an AuthSub token to authorize my application to have access to the user's Google Calendar. I have added the domain parameter to the method gdata.auth.generate_auth_sub_url so that the application is authenticated against a Google Apps Domain user. The app is then installed in one of our test domains. This is working fine, however, each user in the domain has to go through the authorization process. In other Marketplace Apps that I have tried, this authorization is done once for the whole domain when the app is installed. How is this achieved?

  Read the article

• Dynamic model choice field in django formset using multiple select elements

  - by Aryeh Leib Taurog

  I posted this question on the django-users list, but haven't had a reply there yet. I have models that look something like this: class ProductGroup(models.Model): name = models.CharField(max_length=10, primary_key=True) def __unicode__(self): return self.name class ProductRun(models.Model): date = models.DateField(primary_key=True) def __unicode__(self): return self.date.isoformat() class CatalogItem(models.Model): cid = models.CharField(max_length=25, primary_key=True) group = models.ForeignKey(ProductGroup) run = models.ForeignKey(ProductRun) pnumber = models.IntegerField() def __unicode__(self): return self.cid class Meta: unique_together = ('group', 'run', 'pnumber') class Transaction(models.Model): timestamp = models.DateTimeField() user = models.ForeignKey(User) item = models.ForeignKey(CatalogItem) quantity = models.IntegerField() price = models.FloatField() Let's say there are about 10 ProductGroups and 10-20 relevant ProductRuns at any given time. Each group has 20-200 distinct product numbers (pnumber), so there are at least a few thousand CatalogItems. I am working on formsets for the Transaction model. Instead of a single select menu with the several thousand CatalogItems for the ForeignKey field, I want to substitute three drop-down menus, for group, run, and pnumber, which uniquely identify the CatalogItem. I'd also like to limit the choices in the second two drop-downs to those runs and pnumbers which are available for the currently selected product group (I can update them via AJAX if the user changes the product group, but it's important that the initial page load as described without relying on AJAX). What's the best way to do this? As a point of departure, here's what I've tried/considered so far: My first approach was to exclude the item foreign key field from the form, add the substitute dropdowns by overriding the add_fields method of the formset, and then extract the data and populate the fields manually on the model instances before saving them. It's straightforward and pretty simple, but it's not very reusable and I don't think it is the right way to do this. My second approach was to create a new field which inherits both MultiValueField and ModelChoiceField, and a corresponding MultiWidget subclass. This seems like the right approach. As Malcolm Tredinnick put it in a django-users discussion, "the 'smarts' of a field lie in the Field class." The problem I'm having is when/where to fetch the lists of choices from the db. The code I have now does it in the Field's __init__, but that means I have to know which ProductGroup I'm dealing with before I can even define the Form class, since I have to instantiate the Field when I define the form. So I have a factory function which I call at the last minute from my view--after I know what CatalogItems I have and which product group they're in--to create form/formset classes and instantiate them. It works, but I wonder if there's a better way. After all, the field should be able to determine the correct choices much later on, once it knows its current value. Another problem is that my implementation limits the entire formset to transactions relating to (CatalogItems from) a single ProductGroup. A third possibility I'm entertaining is to put it all in the Widget class. Once I have the related model instance, or the cid, or whatever the widget is given, I can get the ProductGroup and construct the drop-downs. This would solve the issues with my second approach, but doesn't seem like the right approach.

  Read the article

• Django - Better evaluation of relationship at the model level

  - by Brant

  Here's a simple relational pair of models. class Shelf(models.Model): name = models.CharField(max_length=100) def has_books(self): if Book.objects.filter(shelf=self): return True else: return False class Book(models.Model): shelf = models.ForeignKey(Shelf) name = models.CharField(max_length=100) Is there a better (or alternative) way to write the "has_book" method? I'm not a fan of the double database hit but I want to do this at the model level.

  Read the article

• Learning MVC - Maintaining model state

  - by GenericTypeTea

  First of all, I'm very new to MVC. Bought the books, but not got the T-Shirt yet. I've put together my first little application, but I'm looking at the way I'm maintaining my model and I don't think it looks right. My form contains the following: <% using (Html.BeginForm("Reconfigured", null, FormMethod.Post, new { id = "configurationForm" })) { %> <%= Html.DropDownList("selectedCompany", new SelectList(Model.Companies, Model.SelectedCompany), new { onchange = "$('#configurationForm').submit()" })%> <%= Html.DropDownList("selectedDepartment", new SelectList(Model.Departments, Model.SelectedDepartment), new { onchange = "$('#configurationForm').submit()" })%> <%=Html.TextArea("comment", Model.Comment) %> <%} %> My controller has the following: public ActionResult Index(string company, string department, string comment) { TestModel form = new TestModel(); form.Departments = _someRepository.GetList(); form.Companies = _someRepository.GetList(); form.Comment = comment; form.SelectedCompany = company; form.SelectedDepartment = department; return View(form); } [HttpPost] public ActionResult Reconfigured(string selectedCompany, string selectedDepartment, string comment) { return RedirectToAction("Index", new { company = selectedCompany, department = selectedDepartment, comment = comment}); } And finally, this is my route: routes.MapRoute( "Default", "{controller}/{company}/{department}", new { controller = "CompanyController", action = "Index", company="", department="" } ); Now, every time I change DropDownList value, all my values are maintained. I end up with a URL like the following after the Reconfigure action is called: http://localhost/Main/Index/Company/Sales?comment=Foo%20Bar Ideally I'd like the URL to remain as: http://localhost/Main/Index My routing object is probably wrong. This can't be the right way? It seems totally wrong to me as for each extra field I add, I have to add the property into the Index() method? I had a look at this answer where the form is passed through TempData. This is obviously an improvement, but it's not strongly typed? Is there a way to do something similar but have it strongly typed? This may be a simple-enough question, but the curse of 10 years of WinForms/WebForms makes this MVC malarky hard to get your head 'round.

  Read the article

• Logging from symfony's model layer

  - by naag

  I'm currently working on a project with symfony 1.4 and Doctrine 1.2. I'm looking for a proper way to do logging from the model layer. In some model classes I use the record hook postSave() to create a ZIP file using exec() (since PHP zip doesn't provide for storage method 'Stored'). To be sure that everythings works fine I check the return code and log an error if something goes wrong. My first naive approach was to do it like this: if ($returnCode != 0) { sfContext::getInstance()->getLogger()->debug(...); } As you know, this doesn't work so well because sfContext belongs to the controller layer and shouldn't be used from the model layer. My next try was to use the model's constructor to pass in an sfLogger instance, but this doesn't work due to Doctrine 1.2 reserving the constructor for internal use (Doctrine 1.2 Documentation). I'm looking forward for your suggestions!

  Read the article

• redirecting domain to nameservers in heroku?

  - by user163352

  i have configured my domain to heroku ip's 75.101.163.44 75.101.145.87 174.129.212.2 But its not redirecting my app to domain..error says There is no app configured at that hostname. Perhaps the app owner has renamed it, or you mistyped the URL. did each heroku app has unique ip address.if so how to get the unique ip and how to redirect it to domain.. thanks..

  Read the article

• django powering multiple shops from one code base on a single domain

  - by imanc

  Hey, I am new to django and python and am trying to figure out how to modify an existing app to run multiple shops through a single domain. Django's sites middleware seems inappropriate in this particular case because it manages different domains, not sites run through the same domain, e.g. : domain.com/uk domain.com/us domain.com/es etc. Each site will need translated content - and minor template changes. The solution needs to be flexible enough to allow for easy modification of templates. The forms will also need to vary a bit, e.g minor variances in fields and validation for each country specific shop. I am thinking along the lines of the following as a solution and would love some feedback from experienced django-ers: In short: same codebase, but separate country specific urls files, separate templates and separate database Create a middleware class that does IP localisation, determines the country based on the URL and creates a database connection, e.g. /au/ will point to the au specific database and so on. in root urls.py have routes that point to a separate country specific routing file, e..g (r'^au/',include('urls_au')), (r'^es/',include('urls_es')), use a single template directory but in that directory have a localised directory structure, e.g. /base.html and /uk/base.html and write a custom template loader that looks for local templates first. (or have a separate directory for each shop and set the template directory path in middleware) use the django internationalisation to manage translation strings throughout slight variances in forms and models (e.g. ZA has an ID field, France has 'door code' and 'floor' etc.) I am unsure how to handle these variations but I suspect the tables will contain all fields but allowing nulls and the model will have all fields but allowing nulls. The forms will to be modified slightly for each shop. Anyway, I am keen to get feedback on the best way to go about achieving this multi site solution. It seems like it would work, but feels a bit "hackish" and I wonder if there's a more elegant way of getting this solution to work. Thanks, imanc

  Read the article

• ASP.NET MVC: customized design per domain

  - by Feryt

  Hi. I'm thinking about ASP.NET MVC 2 project which should display the same Domain Model(with different data) in different mark-up or page design(selected by url domain). I'm not sure which one ot these to use : set of views per unique domain + one default? use areas? any other idea? How would you do that? Thank you.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105  | Next Page >