You searched for the word(s): userid:176677

More Search Options

RSS Available

• Re: Why not support post-backs?

  [quote user="levib"]This isn't necessarily always true. For example, consider the paths /Blog/Post and /Blog/View/{id} . To create a new post for your blog, you navigate to the Post action and are presented with the standard text entry items. If when you submit the entry the form posts to /Blog/Post and there happens to be an error with the submission (e.g. no title supplied, invalid entry date, etc.), you can output the error message to the page and also have access to an automated

  Posted to ASP.NET MVC (Forum) by shinakuma on 3/27/2008

• Re: MVC multithreading

  Current HttpContext is stored with the initial thread that is processing the current request. Which means you won't be able to access anything off of the context (there won't be one), such as the HttpResponse object, in your second thread. You should also be careful about spinning off additional threads in a web app, too many threads can kill your through put.

  Posted to ASP.NET MVC (Forum) by shinakuma on 1/14/2008

• Re: MVC, Global.asax, and IoC

  [quote user="abombss"]MyHelper = new MyHelper( new Dep1( new Dep12), new Dep2());[/quote] I guess. But working with monorail, I have yet to find a need for a complex helper like that. It's all html generation after all. And in monorail, the controllers also construct all the helpers and passing them to the view as well. since nvelocity (and brail?) doesn't have the concept of codebehind. Views are nothing more than a templating engine. Would having views instantiate complex helpers

  Posted to ASP.NET MVC (Forum) by shinakuma on 1/4/2008

• Re: How about a very complex page which need many "MVC modules/parts" ?

  [quote user="abombss"]RenderView calls a process request anyway to kick off the asp.net pipeline which is needed to render the view.[/quote] No, RenderView will call the ProcessRequest on the aspx page handler to render the view page. That only goes through the page life cycle on the apsx. It's very different from the ProcessRequest on the MvcHandler.

  Posted to ASP.NET MVC (Forum) by shinakuma on 1/4/2008

• Re: MVC, Global.asax, and IoC

  [quote user="abombss"]A windsor view factory isn't a bad idea for injecting helpers into the view.[/quote] Still not exactly sure why you would want DI on the views, unless you want to make the entire view mockable and testable. Are there actually people doing unit tests on view rendering logic? Usually something like Watir is sufficient. If I'm not mistaken, the brail view engine supports Windsor integration. Maybe someone with experience in brail can shed some light on the benefit

  Posted to ASP.NET MVC (Forum) by shinakuma on 1/4/2008

• Re: Bug in HttpRequest.PhysicalPath

  [quote user="abombss"]I just noticed today when I was playing around with path's that PhysicalPath does not return the path to the actual view file executing.[/quote] Nor should it. The documentation says PhysicalPath is "The file system path of the current request ." According to that, what you are seeing is exactly what I would expect the property to return, a request url translated to file system path. Plus, it would be nearly impossible to determine the actual view until

  Posted to ASP.NET MVC (Forum) by shinakuma on 1/4/2008

• Re: MVC, Global.asax, and IoC

  [quote user="brianjlowry"]Since Windsor did so well with my controllers, I thought using it on views would be the next logical step[/quote] No. Your controller should read the config settings and pass that onto the view. Config settings is no different than any other type of data source, so to speak. And creating a wrapper to access config setting for testability is a perfectly good approach.

  Posted to ASP.NET MVC (Forum) by shinakuma on 1/4/2008

• Re: How about a very complex page which need many "MVC modules/parts" ?

  [quote user="Kepler"]I like your solution shinakuma, in that you call ProcessRequest. That seems a bit heavy though, to just call a controller method and output a snippet of html. I managed to use IController's Execute method, but I think that's too heavy as well, plus it was very hackish to get it to work.[/quote] The goal wasn't to just call a controller method, but to invoke a full MVC cycle, going through a typical execution pipeline like any other request, thus preserving

  Posted to ASP.NET MVC (Forum) by shinakuma on 1/3/2008

• Re: MVC, Global.asax, and IoC

  Reading your post, I couple questions come to mind. 1. Why do you feel the need to want DI on the view? 2. How are you enabling DI on the view? Or are you expecting this out of the box (because it doesn't do that). You need to write some custom extensions to make the magic happen. First, you need a view factory that is IoC aware. Then you have to figure out how to register all the pages and user controls with the container, in this case Windsor. Since .aspx and .ascx are parsed and compiled on

  Posted to ASP.NET MVC (Forum) by shinakuma on 1/3/2008

• Re: MVC Theory - Action Responsibilities? (really long)

  [quote user="sergiopereira"]There's something to be said for adhering to a standard set of operations. [/quote] That part we can all agree on. It's the number one reason why I like REST. Just not a big fan of creating phantom entities that don't exist in the domain to satisfy the more restrictive CRUD pattern, that's all.

  Posted to ASP.NET MVC (Forum) by shinakuma on 12/28/2007