I'm trying to use a composite custom activity that apply a regular expression and return a boolean if it match.
The pattern is something encoded in design time.
The source text is coming from an activity. This activity is also specified in design time (I've made a activity designer that allow to drop an activity as source)
But I also need to return what sub string match the expression, so I added an OutArgument to retrieve the string that match, and the string captured.
Here is the code:
public class RegularExpression : NativeActivity<bool>
{
[RequiredArgument]
public string Pattern { get; set; }
public OutArgument<string> Captured { get; set; }
[RequiredArgument]
public Activity<string> RetrieveTextActivity { get; set; }
protected override void CacheMetadata(NativeActivityMetadata metadata)
{
metadata.AddChild(this.RetrieveTextActivity);
}
protected override void Execute(NativeActivityContext context)
{
if (this.RetrieveTextActivity != null)
context.ScheduleActivity<string>(this.RetrieveTextActivity, this.onRetrieveComplete);
}
private void onRetrieveComplete(NativeActivityContext context, ActivityInstance completedInstance, string result)
{
var regexp = new Regex(this.Pattern);
var match = regexp.Match(result);
this.Result.Set(context, match.Success);
if (this.Captured != null)
this.Captured.Set(context, match.Value);
}
}
If I execute this activity without binding a variable to the Captured argument, it works as expected (the Result is correctly set).
But if I use the designer to add a variable, then I bind the variable to the Captured argument this error popup:
The argument of type 'System.String' cannot be used. Make sure that
it is declared on an activity.
The exception is thrown when executing this line:
this.Captured.Set(context, match.Value);
Does someone have an idea why I can't set the argument ?
I also read that I shouldn't test that Captured is null, the runtime should automatically set a default value. But If I don't test, I've a NullReference when I don't bind a variable to the argument...
EDIT:
I want to add more information about the workflow itself. I've read in another topic that it may be VS. Here I just want to specify that I'm using a rehosted designer to create the workflow (and not VS). The workflow is then saved as XML in a database.
When I need to start a new workflow, I read the database, use XamlService.Load and Run the created workflow.
Does the error go away if you declare the argument in CacheMetadata?
protected override void CacheMetadata(NativeActivityMetadata metadata)
{
metadata.AddChild(this.RetrieveTextActivity);
RuntimeArgument argument = new RuntimeArgument("Captured", typeof(string), ArgumentDirection.Out);
metadata.Bind(this.Captured, argument);
metadata.AddArgument(argument);
}
EDIT: I was too quick. The above code should now compile and hopefully fix your problem.
My problem went away when I just called the base.CachMetadata(metadata) after my adds. Try:
protected override void CacheMetadata(NativeActivityMetadata metadata)
{
metadata.AddChild(this.RetrieveTextActivity);
base.CacheMetadata(metadata);
}
You want to do it after your adds, because you want the base class to know what you've added when you call it. I think the base class uses reflection to do Damir Arh's answer for you automatically. This way you don't have to add or modify all that code every time you add or modify your properties. If you had a lot of properties it would become a pain real fast.
Related
I have an aggregate root like this:
Aggregate root:
#NoArgsConstructor
#Aggregate(repository = "positionAggregateRepository")
#AggregateRoot
#XSlf4j
#Data
public class HopAggregate {
#AggregateIdentifier
private String hopId;
private FilteredPosition position;
private LocalDate positionDate;
#AggregateMember
private Security security;
#CommandHandler
public HopAggregate(NewHopCommand cmd) {
log.info("creating new position , {}", cmd.getDateId());
apply(new HopEvent(cmd.getHopId(), cmd.getDateId(), cmd.getFilteredPosition(), cmd.getSecurity(), false));
}
#CommandHandler
public void handle(UpdateHopCommand cmd) {
log.info("creating hop update event {}", cmd);
apply(new HopEvent(this.hopId, this.positionDate, cmd.getFilteredPosition(), this.security, true));
}
#CommandHandler
public void handle(SecurityUpdate cmd) {
log.info("updating security {}", cmd);
apply(new SecurityUpdateEvent(this.hopId, cmd.getFilteredSecurity()));
}
#EventSourcingHandler
public void on(HopEvent evt) {
if (evt.getIsUpdate()) {
log.info("updating position {}", evt);
this.position = evt.getFilteredPosition();
} else {
log.info("adding new position to date {}", evt);
this.hopId = evt.getHopId();
this.positionDate = evt.getDate();
this.position = evt.getFilteredPosition();
this.security= evt.getSecurity();
}
}
#EventSourcingHandler
public void on(SecurityUpdateEvent evt) {
log.info("hop id {}, security update {}", this.hopId, evt.getFilteredSecurity().getSecurityId());
}
}
Child entity:
#XSlf4j
#Data
#RequiredArgsConstructor
#NoArgsConstructor
public class IpaSecurity implements Serializable {
#EntityId
#NonNull
private String id;
#NonNull
private FilteredSecurity security;
}
My issue is that when i am pushing and update like this:
#EventHandler
public void handleSecurityEvent(SecurityUpdate securityUpdate) {
log.info("got security event {}", securityUpdate);
commandGateway.send(securityUpdate);
}
and my command being:
#Data
#RequiredArgsConstructor
#NoArgsConstructor
#ToString
public class SecurityUpdate {
#NonNull
#TargetAggregateIdentifier
private String id;
#NonNull
private FilteredSecurity filteredSecurity;
}
I am getting aggregate root not found exception:
Command 'com.hb.apps.ipa.events.SecurityUpdate' resulted in org.axonframework.modelling.command.AggregateNotFoundException(The aggregate was not found in the event store)
I am not sure how to handle this scenario. My requirement is that each aggregate should check whether it contains the security and then update it if the command was issued. What am i missing? let me know if you need any more info on the code.
Thanks for your help.
A Command is always targeted towards a single entity.
This entity can be an Aggregate, an entity contained in an Aggregate (what Axon Framework calls an Aggregate Member) or a simple singleton component.
Important to note though, is that there will only be one entity handling the command.
This is what requires you to set the #TargetAggregateIdentifier in your Command for Axon to be able to route it to a single Aggregate instance if the Command Handler in question is part of it.
The AggregateNotFoundException you're getting signals that the #TargetAggregateIdentifier annotated field in your SecurityUpdate command does no correspond to any existing Aggregate.
I'd thus suspect that the id field in the SecurityUpdate does not correspond to any #AggregateIdentifier annotated field in your HopAggregate aggregates.
A part from the above, I have a couple of other suggestions when looking at your snippets which I'd like to share with you:
#Aggregate is meta-annotated with #AggregateRoot. You're thus not required to specify both on an Aggregate class
For logging messages being handled, you can utilize LoggingInterceptor. You can configure this on any component capable of handling messages, thus providing a universal way of logging. This will omit the necessity to add log lines in your message handling functions
You're publishing a HopEvent on both the create and update commands. Doing so makes your HopEvent very generic. Ideally, your events clarify business operations occurring in your system. My rule of thumb typically is such: "If I tell my business manager/customer about the event class, he/she should know exactly what it does". I'd thus suggest to rename the event to something more specific
Just as with the HopEvent, the UpdateHopCommand is quite generic. Your commands should express the intent to perform an operation in your application. Users will typically not desire an update, they desire an address change for example. Your commands classes ideally reflect this
The suggested naming convention for commands is to start with verb in the present tense. Thus, it should no be SecurityUpdate, but UpdateSecurity. A command is a request expressing intent, the messages ideally reflect this
Hope this helps you out #juggernaut!
can someone please explain me the code written below
public IList<GetProductPrice> CurrentPage
{
get { return ViewState["CurrentPage"] as List<GetProductPrice>; }
set { ViewState["CurrentPage"] = value; }
}
It is called a Property. They generate a getter and setter functions when compiled:
List<GetProductPrice> GetCurrentPage(){
return ViewState["CurrentPage"] as List<GetProductPrice>;
}
void SetCurrentPage(List<GetProductPrice> value) {
ViewState["CurrentPage"] = value;
}
//i think its actual get_.. but it doesn't matter for the example
So its generates ease of use getter setters. which you can just call by using:
var test = CurrentPage; //compiled to var test = GetCurrenctPage();
CurrentPage = test; //compiled to SetCurrentPage(test);
If you leave the getter and setter empty like this:
public int CurrentPage
{
get;
set;
}
it will also generate a backing field on the class where it stores the data:
private int _currentPage;
public GetCurrentPage(){ return _currentPage }
public SetCurrentPage(int value) { _currentPage = value }
Why do we do this?
Using getters and setters is a very old best practise from java (where ide's would have an option to generate them). But this would lead to a lot of boilerplate code!
In C# they try to counter this by adding these properties. But why do we need getters and setters? For example if you want to be notified when a value changes (to mark the classes it self as dirty). I think entity framework uses it to track if a model is changed otherwise it wont do a db update call. There are also other usefull tools that inject code in properties on compile time. to add extra functionality.
How not to use it:
using properties to return HttpContext.Current Is a dangerous one because you secretly depend on the HttpContext so try not to do this at any time!
Generally its also bad practise to use it when the code inside the get or set is very heavy (very instensive). Its bad practise because someone else using the code might think he is just setting a property/field while actually some very heavy code is executed. its best practice to make a special function for this instead and private the getter/setter:
public int Property {get; private set; }
public SetProperty(int value){
//intensive code here:
Property = value;
}
This property is letting the consumer of the property to use it like Local collection without referring the ViewState in the code. It will make the code simple and easy to use.
get { return ViewState["CurrentPage"] as List<GetProductPrice>; }
Here the ViewState object ViewState["CurrentPage"] is converted to list of GetProductPrice
set { ViewState["CurrentPage"] = value; }
Here the List is assigned to ViewState["CurrentPage"]
This code will only work in a controller, where ViewState is a property. This CurrentPage property provides a statically-typed way to access a certain ViewState item through that property.
So instead of sprinkling ViewState["CurrentPage"] as List<GetProductPrice> all over your controller code where you want to access the "current page", you can now simply use the CurrentPage property.
Of course "current page" is a term made up by the developer who chose to name things like this, I don't see how a List<GetProductPrice> has a relation to the "current page".
I'm pretty new to MVVM light world, and after searches I can't find what I want to do.
My WP7 application contains a pivot, each pivot item content is View1 and viewmodel is VM1.
When loading my application, I'd like to create every pivot item with the same view and view model but with different parameter.
example :
PivotItem 1 -> send param "car" to the view model
PivotItem 2 -> send param "truck" to the view model, etc.
Google told me to use messaging but if I send 2 messages from my MainViewModel, both PivotItem1 and PivotItem2 ViewModel will receive these messages.
Am I wrong with this approach ?
Is there another solution to succeed ?
Thank you in advance for your answer.
PS : be indulgent, english is not my native language, don't hesitate to ask for further information.
Regards,
Aymeric Lagier
To seperate the messages use the second constructor signature whereby you can pass a token. This token can be anything but I generally use an enum to store all my message types within the system.
Create a static class in a common library and reference this in all projects where you need to send or receive messages.
The following code hopefully shows this approach, notice I am sending a string as a value within the message but this can be anything, even a complex object such as one of your business objects.
namespace MyProject.Common
{
public static class AppMessages
{
enum MessageTypes
{
ViewmodelA,
ViewmodelB
}
public static class ViewModelAUpdate
{
public static void Send(string value)
{
Messenger.Default.Send(value, MessageTypes.ViewmodelA);
}
public static void Register(object recipient, Action<string> action)
{
Messenger.Default.Register(recipient, MessageTypes.ViewmodelA, action);
}
}
public static class ViewModelBUpdate
{
public static void Send(string value)
{
Messenger.Default.Send(value, MessageTypes.ViewmodelB);
}
public static void Register(object recipient, Action<string> action)
{
Messenger.Default.Register(recipient, MessageTypes.ViewmodelB, action);
}
}
}
}
How about using a method to set the message you want to receive. (this could be done as a parameter in the constructor or a property as well)
public void RegisterForAppMessage(AppMessages.MessageTypes messageType)
{
switch (messageType)
{
case AppMessages.MessageTypes.PivotViewItem1Message:
AppMessages.PivotViewItem1Message.Register(this,DoSomethingWhenIRecievePivotViewItem1Messages)
break;
case AppMessages.MessageTypes.PivotViewItem2Message:
AppMessages.PivotViewItem2Message.Register(this,DoSomethingWhenIRecievePivotViewItem2Messages)
break;
}
}
private void DoSomethingWhenIRecievePivotViewItem2Messages(string obj)
{
// TODO: Implement this method
throw new NotImplementedException();
}
private void DoSomethingWhenIRecievePivotViewItem1Messages(string obj)
{
// TODO: Implement this method
throw new NotImplementedException();
}
Messaging sounds a bit heavy for this purpose. Could you simply inject a parameter into your ViewModel. If you already have MVVMLight you also have support for SimpleIOC. Maybe let the view locate its ViewModel when the view is resolved and there decide which parameter to use on the view model?
You can see an example of it here
In my ASP.NET MVC 2 web application, I allow users to create custom input fields of different data types to extend our basic input form. While tricky, building the input form from a collection of custom fields is straight-forward enough.
However, I'm now to the point where I want to handle the posting of this form and I'm not certain what the best way to handle this would be. Normally, we'd use strongly-typed input models that get bound from the various statically-typed inputs available on the form. However, I'm at a loss for how to do this with a variable number of input fields that represent different data types.
A representative input form might look something like:
My date field: [ date time input
control ]
My text field: [ text input
field ]
My file field: [ file upload
control ]
My number field: [ numerical input control ]
My text field 2: [text input field ]
etc...
Ideas I've thought about are:
Sending everything as strings (except for the file inputs, which would need to be handled specially).
Using a model with an "object" property and attempting to bind to that (if this is even possible).
Sending a json request to my controller with the data encoded properly and attempting to parse that.
Manually processing the form collection in my controller post action - certainly an option, but I'd love to avoid this.
Has anyone tackled an issue like this before? If so, how did you solve it?
Update:
My "base" form is handled on another input area all together, so a solution doesn't need to account for any sort of inheritence magic for this. I'm just interested in handling the custom fields on this interface, not my "base" ones.
Update 2:
Thank you to ARM and smartcaveman; both of you provided good guidance for how this could be done. I will update this question with my final solution once its been implemented.
This is how I would begin to approach the issue. A custom model binder would be pretty easy to build based on the FormKey property (which could be determined by the index and/or label, depending).
public class CustomFormModel
{
public string FormId { get; set; }
public string Label { get; set; }
public CustomFieldModel[] Fields { get; set; }
}
public class CustomFieldModel
{
public DataType DateType { get; set; } // System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations
public string FormKey { get; set; }
public string Label { get; set; }
public object Value { get; set; }
}
public class CustomFieldModel<T> : CustomFieldModel
{
public new T Value { get; set; }
}
Also, I noticed one of the comments below had a filtered model binder system. Jimmy Bogard from Automapper made a really helpful post about this method at http://www.lostechies.com/blogs/jimmy_bogard/archive/2009/03/17/a-better-model-binder.aspx , and later revised in, http://www.lostechies.com/blogs/jimmy_bogard/archive/2009/11/19/a-better-model-binder-addendum.aspx . It has been very helpful for me in building custom model binders.
Update
I realized that I misinterpreted the question, and that he was specifically asking how to handle posting of the form "with a variable number of input fields that represent different data types". I think the best way to do this is to use a structure similar to above but leverage the Composite Pattern. Basically, you will need to create an interface like IFormComponent and implement it for each datatype that would be represented. I wrote and commented an example interface to help explain how this would be accomplished:
public interface IFormComponent
{
// the id on the html form field. In the case of a composite Id, that doesn't have a corresponding
// field you should still use something consistent, since it will be helpful for model binding
// (For example, a CompositeDateField appearing as the third field in the form should have an id
// something like "frmId_3_date" and its child fields would be "frmId_3_date_day", "frmId_3_date_month",
// and "frmId_3_date_year".
string FieldId { get; }
// the human readable field label
string Label { get; }
// some functionality may require knowledge of the
// Parent component. For example, a DayField with a value of "30"
// would need to ask its Parent, a CompositeDateField
// for its MonthField's value in order to validate
// that the month is not "February"
IFormComponent Parent { get; }
// Gets any child components or null if the
// component is a leaf component (has no children).
IList<IFormComponent> GetChildren();
// For leaf components, this method should accept the AttemptedValue from the value provider
// during Model Binding, and create the appropriate value.
// For composites, the input should be delimited in someway, and this method should parse the
// string to create the child components.
void BindTo(string value);
// This method should parse the Children or Underlying value to the
// default used by your business models. (e.g. a CompositeDateField would
// return a DateTime. You can get type safety by creating a FormComponent<TValue>
// which would help to avoid issues in binding.
object GetValue();
// This method would render the field to the http response stream.
// This makes it easy to render the forms simply by looping through
// the array. Implementations could extend this for using an injected
// formatting
void Render(TextWriter writer);
}
I am assuming that the custom forms can be accessed via some sort of id which can be contained as a form parameter. With that assumption, the model binder and provider could look something like this.
public interface IForm : IFormComponent
{
Guid FormId { get; }
void Add(IFormComponent component);
}
public interface IFormRepository
{
IForm GetForm(Guid id);
}
public class CustomFormModelBinder : IModelBinder
{
private readonly IFormRepository _repository;
public object BindModel(ControllerContext controllerContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext)
{
ValueProviderResult result;
if(bindingContext.ValueProvider.TryGetValue("_customFormId", out result))
{
var form = _repository.GetForm(new Guid(result.AttemptedValue));
var fields = form.GetChildren();
// loop through the fields and bind their values
return form;
}
throw new Exception("Form ID not found.");
}
}
Obviously, all the code here is just to get the point across, and would need to be completed and cleaned up for actual use. Also, even if completed this would only bind to an implementation of the IForm interface, not a strongly typed business object. (It wouldn't be a huge step to convert it to a dictionary and build a strongly typed proxy using the Castle DictionaryAdapter, but since your users are dynamically creating the forms on the site, there is probably no strongly typed model in your solution and this is irrelevant). Hope this helps more.
Take a peek at what I did here: MVC2 Action to handle multiple models and see if can get you on the right track.
If you use a FormCollection as one of your parameters to your action, you can then go thru that form collection looking for bits of data here or there in order to bind those values to whatever an then save the data. You are most likely going to need to take advantage of both strategy and command patterns to get this to work.
Best of luck, feel free to ask follow-up questions.
Edit:
Your method which does the work should look something like this:
private/public void SaveCustomFields(var formId, FormCollection collection) //var as I don't know what type you are using to Id the form.
{
var binders = this.binders.select(b => b.CanHandle(collection)); //I used IOC to get my list of IBinder objects
// Method 1:
binders.ForEach(b => b.Save(formId, collection)); //This is the execution implementation.
// Method 2:
var commands = binders.Select(b => b.Command(formId, collection));
commands.ForEach(c => c.Execute());
}
public DateBinder : IBinder //Example binder
{
public bool CanHandle(FormCollection collection)
{
return (null != collection["MyDateField"]); //Whatever the name of this field is.
}
//Method 1
public void Save(var formId, FormCollection collection)
{
var value = DateTime.Parse(collection["MyDateField"]);
this.someLogic.Save(formId, value); //Save the value with the formId, or however you wish to save it.
}
//Method 2
public Command Command(var formId, FormCollection collection)
{
//I haven't done command pattern before so I'm not sure exactly what to do here.
//Sorry that I can't help further than that.
}
}
I would think one of the best options is to create a custom model binder, which makes it possible to have custom logic behind the scenes and still very customizable code behind.
Maybe these articles can help you:
http://www.gregshackles.com/2010/03/templated-helpers-and-custom-model-binders-in-asp-net-mvc-2/
http://www.singingeels.com/Articles/Model_Binders_in_ASPNET_MVC.aspx
More specifically I would probably take as the controller argument a custom class with all "base" properties included. The class could then for example include a dictionary linking the name of each field to either just an object or an interface which you implement once for each data-type making it simple to process the data later.
/Victor
I'm looking for a best practice solution that aims to reduce the amount of URLs that are hard-coded in an ASP.NET application.
For example, when viewing a product details screen, performing an edit on these details, and then submitting the changes, the user is redirected back to the product listing screen. Instead of coding the following:
Response.Redirect("~/products/list.aspx?category=books");
I would like to have a solution in place that allows me to do something like this:
Pages.GotoProductList("books");
where Pages is a member of the common base class.
I'm just spit-balling here, and would love to hear any other way in which anyone has managed their application redirects.
EDIT
I ended up creating the following solution: I already had a common base class, to which I added a Pages enum (thanks Mark), with each item having a System.ComponentModel.DescriptionAttribute attribute containing the page's URL:
public enum Pages
{
[Description("~/secure/default.aspx")]
Landing,
[Description("~/secure/modelling/default.aspx")]
ModellingHome,
[Description("~/secure/reports/default.aspx")]
ReportsHome,
[Description("~/error.aspx")]
Error
}
Then I created a few overloaded methods to handle different scenarios. I used reflection to get the URL of the page through it's Description attribute, and I pass query-string parameters as an anonymous type (also using reflection to add each property as a query-string parameter):
private string GetEnumDescription(Enum value)
{
Type type = value.GetType();
string name = Enum.GetName(type, value);
if (name != null)
{
FieldInfo field = type.GetField(name);
if (field != null)
{
DescriptionAttribute attr = Attribute.GetCustomAttribute(field, typeof(DescriptionAttribute)) as DescriptionAttribute;
if (attr != null)
return attr.Description;
}
}
return null;
}
protected string GetPageUrl(Enums.Pages target, object variables)
{
var sb = new StringBuilder();
sb.Append(UrlHelper.ResolveUrl(Helper.GetEnumDescription(target)));
if (variables != null)
{
sb.Append("?");
var properties = (variables.GetType()).GetProperties();
foreach (var property in properties)
sb.Append(string.Format("{0}={1}&", property.Name, property.GetValue(variables, null)));
}
return sb.ToString();
}
protected void GotoPage(Enums.Pages target, object variables, bool useTransfer)
{
if(useTransfer)
HttpContext.Current.Server.Transfer(GetPageUrl(target, variables));
else
HttpContext.Current.Response.Redirect(GetPageUrl(target, variables));
}
A typical call would then look like so:
GotoPage(Enums.Pages.Landing, new {id = 12, category = "books"});
Comments?
I'd suggest that you derive your own class ("MyPageClass") from the Page class and include this method there:
public class MyPageClass : Page
{
private const string productListPagePath = "~/products/list.aspx?category=";
protected void GotoProductList(string category)
{
Response.Redirect(productListPagePath + category);
}
}
Then, in your codebehind, make sure that your page derives from this class:
public partial class Default : MyPageClass
{
...
}
within that, you can redirect just by using:
GotoProductList("Books");
Now, this is a bit limited as is since you'll undoubtedly have a variety of other pages like the ProductList page. You could give each one of them its own method in your page class but this is kind of grody and not smoothly extensible.
I solve a problem kind of like this by keeping a db table with a page name/file name mapping in it (I'm calling external, dynamically added HTML files, not ASPX files so my needs are a bit different but I think the principles apply). Your call would then use either a string or, better yet, an enum to redirect:
protected void GoToPage(PageTypeEnum pgType, string category)
{
//Get the enum-to-page mapping from a table or a dictionary object stored in the Application space on startup
Response.Redirect(GetPageString(pgType) + category); // *something* like this
}
From your page your call would be: GoToPage(enumProductList, "Books");
The nice thing is that the call is to a function defined in an ancestor class (no need to pass around or create manager objects) and the path is pretty obvious (intellisense will limit your ranges if you use an enum).
Good luck!
You have a wealth of options availible, and they all start with creating a mapping dictionary, whereas you can reference a keyword to a hard URL. Whether you chose to store it in a configuration file or database lookup table, your options are endless.
You have a huge number of options available here. Database table or XML file are probably the most commonly used examples.
// Please note i have not included any error handling code.
public class RoutingHelper
{
private NameValueCollecton routes;
private void LoadRoutes()
{
//Get your routes from db or config file
routes = /* what ever your source is*/
}
public void RedirectToSection(string section)
{
if(routes == null) LoadRoutes();
Response.Redirect(routes[section]);
}
}
This is just sample code, and it can be implemented any way you wish. The main question you need to think about is where you want to store the mappings. A simple xml file could do it:
`<mappings>
<map name="Books" value="/products.aspx/section=books"/>
...
</mappings>`
and then just load that into your routes collection.
public class BasePage : Page
{
public virtual string GetVirtualUrl()
{
throw new NotImplementedException();
}
public void PageRedirect<T>() where T : BasePage, new()
{
T page = new T();
Response.Redirect(page.GetVirtualUrl());
}
}
public partial class SomePage1 : BasePage
{
protected void Page_Load()
{
// Redirect to SomePage2.aspx
PageRedirect<SomePage2>();
}
}
public partial class SomePage2 : BasePage
{
public override string GetVirtualUrl()
{
return "~/Folder/SomePage2.aspx";
}
}