Currently I'm writing 2 helper method to extend a implementation where I'm using "IHtmlString", how I can convert this to one method by using "MvcHtmlString"? Help...
public static IHtmlString ExceptionValidationSummary(this HtmlHelper helper)
{
const string template = "<div class=\"ui-widget\"><div class=\"ui-state-error ui-corner-all\" style=\"padding:0 .7em\"><div>" +
"<span class=\"ui-icon ui-icon-alert\" style=\"float: left; margin-right: .3em;\"></span>" +
"<strong>Validation Exceptions:</strong></div><div style=\"margin-top: 5px;\"> " +
"<ul style=\"font-weight: normal;\">{0}</ul></div></div></div>";
StringBuilder exceptionList = new StringBuilder();
// Iterate through the exceptions
foreach (var error in helper.ViewData.ModelState.SelectMany(modelState => modelState.Value.Errors))
{
exceptionList.Append(string.Format("<li>{0}</li>", error.ErrorMessage));
}
return exceptionList.Length.Equals(0) ? string.Format("").Raw() : string.Format(template, exceptionList).Raw();
}
public static IHtmlString Raw(this string value)
{
return new HtmlString(value);
}
Though I'd expect the StringBuilder.ToString() method to be implicitly called by string.Format(), if that is not happening, explicitly call the ToString() method like this:
string.Format(template, exceptionList.ToString())
Also, your method is declared to return an IHtmlString. If you change the signature to use MvcHtmlString, that will tell the compiler your desired return type. At this point, it is just a matter of ensuring the return value matches the updated declaration:
return MvcHtmlString.Create(string.Format(template, exceptionList.ToString()));
Related
I've been trying to experiment with model binding to make our API easier to use. When using the API I can't get the model binding to bind when the data is in the body, only when it is part of the query.
The code I have is:
public class FunkyModelBinder : IModelBinder
{
public bool BindModel(HttpActionContext actionContext, ModelBindingContext bindingContext)
{
var model = (Funky) bindingContext.Model ?? new Funky();
var hasPrefix = bindingContext.ValueProvider
.ContainsPrefix(bindingContext.ModelName);
var searchPrefix = (hasPrefix) ? bindingContext.ModelName + "." : "";
model.Funk = GetValue(bindingContext, searchPrefix, "Funk");
bindingContext.Model = model;
return true;
}
private string GetValue(ModelBindingContext context, string prefix, string key)
{
var result = context.ValueProvider.GetValue(prefix + key);
return result == null ? null : result.AttemptedValue;
}
}
When looking at the ValueProvider property on the bindingContext I only see QueryStringValueProvider and RouteDataValueProvider which I think means that if the data is in the body I won't get it. How should I do this? I would like to support posting data as either json or form-encoded.
I am looking into this as well.
WebApis Model Binder comes with two built in ValueProviders.
QueryStringValueProviderFactory & RouteDataValueProviderFactory
Which are searched when you call
context.ValueProvider.GetValue
This question has some code on how to bind data from the body.
how to pass the result model object out of System.Web.Http.ModelBinding.IModelBinder. BindModel?
You could create a custom ValueProvider to do this as well, probably a better idea - which will be searched for the value matching the key. The above link just does this within the model binder, which limits the ModelBinder to looking only in the body.
public class FormBodyValueProvider : IValueProvider
{
private string body;
public FormBodyValueProvider ( HttpActionContext actionContext )
{
if ( actionContext == null ) {
throw new ArgumentNullException( "actionContext" );
}
//List out all Form Body Values
body = actionContext.Request.Content.ReadAsStringAsync().Result;
}
// Implement Interface and use code to read the body
// and find your Value matching your Key
}
The Goal is to have a list of options (that a user can chose through radio buttons) in one place(for eg: a yaml config file). No other place should have this list hard-coded
I've done something similar to create select elements, and I think enums worked just fine. Doing radio buttons should be very similar. I've set it up so that the labels can be defined in the messages file. I'm going to try to excerpt the relevant portions from my larger auto-form-generation code (using FastTags) the best I can. It's a bit heavy for this one case but it makes sense in the larger system.
I use the tag like #{form.selector 'order.status' /}, which looks find the variable named order in the template, sees that status is declared as public Status status, and then goes to find all the values of the Status enum and generate options for them in the select element.
First, I use a FieldContext object which just contains a bunch of info that's used by the other code to determine what to generate along with some utility methods:
public class FieldContext {
public final Map<?,?> args;
public final ExecutableTemplate template;
public final int fromLine;
public Class clazz = null;
public Field field = null;
public Object object = null;
public Object value = null;
private Map<String,String> attrs = new HashMap<String,String>();
private Map<String,Boolean> printed = new HashMap<String,Boolean>();
private List<Option> options;
...
Then I have this in another helper class (its info gets added to the FieldContext):
public List<Option> determineOptions(FieldContext context) {
List<Option> options = new ArrayList<Option>();
if (context.field.getType().isEnum()) {
for (Object option : context.field.getType().getEnumConstants()) {
options.add(new Option(option.toString(), Message.get(option.toString())));
}
}
return options;
}
then the tag declaration is
public static void _selector(Map<?,?> args, Closure body, PrintWriter out, ExecutableTemplate template, int fromLine) {
String field_name = args.get("arg").toString();
TagContext.current().data.put("name", field_name);
SelectHelper helper = HelperFactory.getHelper(SelectHelper.class);
try {
FieldContext context = new FieldContext(field_name, args, template, fromLine);
helper.autoconfigure(context);
TagContext.current().data.put("selected", helper.determineValue(context));
out.print("<div class=\"formutil-field formutil-selector\">");
out.print("<label for=\"" + context.getAttr("id") + "\">");
out.print(helper.findOrCreateLabel(context));
out.print("</label>");
out.print("<select");
context.printAttribute(out, "id", "name");
out.print(">");
if (context.hasOptions()) {
for (Option option : context.getOptions()) {
out.print("<option value=\"" + option.value + "\">" + option.label + "</option>");
}
}
out.print("</select>");
context.printErrorIfPresent(out);
context.printValidationHints(out);
out.println("</div>");
}
...
}
I am trying to pass a variable from a method in my Controller to a method in a Model. Since the method in the Model takes one argument (which was designed earlier), I cannot pass my variable as an argument to the method in the Model. And also, the method in this Model is called by other controllers too, so if I change the argument, I have to change all the controllers too, which would be a tedious task.
What I have been trying so far is- I created one MyVariableClass and declared a property. Then I instantiated that class and set the property string to the variable that I wanted to pass. Now, in my Model's method, I instantiated the same MyVariableClass again, but when I did that, the value of the variable was set to null. The code I have right now is -
public ActionResult ItemInformation( string id)
{
//Pass a string to MyVariable
MyVariableVClass params = new MyVariableClass();
params.myVariable = "abc";
//This is what My Model is taking as an argument(id), and I don't want to
//pass mYvariable along with that argument because it will break other controllers
// too which calls this method
var itemInformation = _repository.GetItemInformation(id);
return View(itemInformation);
}
and MyVariableClass
public class MyVariableClass
{
public string myVariable { get; set; }
}
and the method in My Model
public IList<Items> GetItemInformation(string itemId)
{
MyVariableClass webType = new MyVariableClass();
var _params = webType.myVariable;
//Check this variable and perform database query
if (_params =="this")
{
var query = myFirstQuery;
}
else
{
var query = mySecondQuery;
}
//return ....
}
Anybody has solution to this? Thanks in Advance!
Any reason why subclassing your model and overriding the GetItemInformation method wouldn't work? Or, even easier, why not just overload the GetItemInformation method with one that takes two strings? Your other controllers can still use the one that only takes a single string.
public IList<Items> GetItemInformation(string itemId, MyVariableClass webType)
{
var _params = webType.myVariable;
//Check this variable and perform database query
if (_params == "this")
{
var query = myFirstQuery;
}
else
{
var query = mySecondQuery;
}
//return ....
}
public IList<Items> GetItemInformation(string itemId)
{
MyVariableClass fauxType = new MyVariableClass();
fauxType.myVariable = "not this";
return GetItemInformation(itemId, fauxType);
}
Try using session variable.
I know i can do this
var nv = HttpUtility.ParseQueryString(req.RawUrl);
But is there a way to convert this back to a url?
var newUrl = HttpUtility.Something("/page", nv);
Simply calling ToString() on the NameValueCollection will return the name value pairs in a name1=value1&name2=value2 querystring ready format. Note that NameValueCollection types don't actually support this and it's misleading to suggest this, but the behavior works here due to the internal type that's actually returned, as explained below.
Thanks to #mjwills for pointing out that the HttpUtility.ParseQueryString method actually returns an internal HttpValueCollection object rather than a regular NameValueCollection (despite the documentation specifying NameValueCollection). The HttpValueCollection automatically encodes the querystring when using ToString(), so there's no need to write a routine that loops through the collection and uses the UrlEncode method. The desired result is already returned.
With the result in hand, you can then append it to the URL and redirect:
var nameValues = HttpUtility.ParseQueryString(Request.QueryString.ToString());
string url = Request.Url.AbsolutePath + "?" + nameValues.ToString();
Response.Redirect(url);
Currently the only way to use a HttpValueCollection is by using the ParseQueryString method shown above (other than reflection, of course). It looks like this won't change since the Connect issue requesting this class be made public has been closed with a status of "won't fix."
As an aside, you can call the Add, Set, and Remove methods on nameValues to modify any of the querystring items before appending it. If you're interested in that see my response to another question.
string q = String.Join("&",
nvc.AllKeys.Select(a => a + "=" + HttpUtility.UrlEncode(nvc[a])));
Make an extension method that uses a couple of loops. I prefer this solution because it's readable (no linq), doesn't require System.Web.HttpUtility, and it supports duplicate keys.
public static string ToQueryString(this NameValueCollection nvc)
{
if (nvc == null) return string.Empty;
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
foreach (string key in nvc.Keys)
{
if (string.IsNullOrWhiteSpace(key)) continue;
string[] values = nvc.GetValues(key);
if (values == null) continue;
foreach (string value in values)
{
sb.Append(sb.Length == 0 ? "?" : "&");
sb.AppendFormat("{0}={1}", Uri.EscapeDataString(key), Uri.EscapeDataString(value));
}
}
return sb.ToString();
}
Example
var queryParams = new NameValueCollection()
{
{ "order_id", "0000" },
{ "item_id", "1111" },
{ "item_id", "2222" },
{ null, "skip entry with null key" },
{ "needs escaping", "special chars ? = &" },
{ "skip entry with null value", null }
};
Console.WriteLine(queryParams.ToQueryString());
Output
?order_id=0000&item_id=1111&item_id=2222&needs%20escaping=special%20chars%20%3F%20%3D%20%26
This should work without too much code:
NameValueCollection nameValues = HttpUtility.ParseQueryString(String.Empty);
nameValues.Add(Request.QueryString);
// modify nameValues if desired
var newUrl = "/page?" + nameValues;
The idea is to use HttpUtility.ParseQueryString to generate an empty collection of type HttpValueCollection. This class is a subclass of NameValueCollection that is marked as internal so that your code cannot easily create an instance of it.
The nice thing about HttpValueCollection is that the ToString method takes care of the encoding for you. By leveraging the NameValueCollection.Add(NameValueCollection) method, you can add the existing query string parameters to your newly created object without having to first convert the Request.QueryString collection into a url-encoded string, then parsing it back into a collection.
This technique can be exposed as an extension method as well:
public static string ToQueryString(this NameValueCollection nameValueCollection)
{
NameValueCollection httpValueCollection = HttpUtility.ParseQueryString(String.Empty);
httpValueCollection.Add(nameValueCollection);
return httpValueCollection.ToString();
}
Actually, you should encode the key too, not just value.
string q = String.Join("&",
nvc.AllKeys.Select(a => $"{HttpUtility.UrlEncode(a)}={HttpUtility.UrlEncode(nvc[a])}"));
Because a NameValueCollection can have multiple values for the same key, if you are concerned with the format of the querystring (since it will be returned as comma-separated values rather than "array notation") you may consider the following.
Example
var nvc = new NameValueCollection();
nvc.Add("key1", "val1");
nvc.Add("key2", "val2");
nvc.Add("empty", null);
nvc.Add("key2", "val2b");
Turn into: key1=val1&key2[]=val2&empty&key2[]=val2b rather than key1=val1&key2=val2,val2b&empty.
Code
string qs = string.Join("&",
// "loop" the keys
nvc.AllKeys.SelectMany(k => {
// "loop" the values
var values = nvc.GetValues(k);
if(values == null) return new[]{ k };
return nvc.GetValues(k).Select( (v,i) =>
// 'gracefully' handle formatting
// when there's 1 or more values
string.Format(
values.Length > 1
// pick your array format: k[i]=v or k[]=v, etc
? "{0}[]={1}"
: "{0}={1}"
, k, HttpUtility.UrlEncode(v), i)
);
})
);
or if you don't like Linq so much...
string qs = nvc.ToQueryString(); // using...
public static class UrlExtensions {
public static string ToQueryString(this NameValueCollection nvc) {
return string.Join("&", nvc.GetUrlList());
}
public static IEnumerable<string> GetUrlList(this NameValueCollection nvc) {
foreach(var k in nvc.AllKeys) {
var values = nvc.GetValues(k);
if(values == null) { yield return k; continue; }
for(int i = 0; i < values.Length; i++) {
yield return
// 'gracefully' handle formatting
// when there's 1 or more values
string.Format(
values.Length > 1
// pick your array format: k[i]=v or k[]=v, etc
? "{0}[]={1}"
: "{0}={1}"
, k, HttpUtility.UrlEncode(values[i]), i);
}
}
}
}
As has been pointed out in comments already, with the exception of this answer most of the other answers address the scenario (Request.QueryString is an HttpValueCollection, "not" a NameValueCollection) rather than the literal question.
Update: addressed null value issue from comment.
The short answer is to use .ToString() on the NameValueCollection and combine it with the original url.
However, I'd like to point out a few things:
You cant use HttpUtility.ParseQueryString on Request.RawUrl. The ParseQueryString() method is looking for a value like this: ?var=value&var2=value2.
If you want to get a NameValueCollection of the QueryString parameters just use Request.QueryString().
var nv = Request.QueryString;
To rebuild the URL just use nv.ToString().
string url = String.Format("{0}?{1}", Request.Path, nv.ToString());
If you are trying to parse a url string instead of using the Request object use Uri and the HttpUtility.ParseQueryString method.
Uri uri = new Uri("<THE URL>");
var nv = HttpUtility.ParseQueryString(uri.Query);
string url = String.Format("{0}?{1}", uri.AbsolutePath, nv.ToString());
I always use UriBuilder to convert an url with a querystring back to a valid and properly encoded url.
var url = "http://my-link.com?foo=bar";
var uriBuilder = new UriBuilder(url);
var query = HttpUtility.ParseQueryString(uriBuilder.Query);
query.Add("yep", "foo&bar");
uriBuilder.Query = query.ToString();
var result = uriBuilder.ToString();
// http://my-link.com:80/?foo=bar&yep=foo%26bar
In AspNet Core 2.0 you can use QueryHelpers AddQueryString method.
As #Atchitutchuk suggested, you can use QueryHelpers.AddQueryString in ASP.NET Core:
public string FormatParameters(NameValueCollection parameters)
{
var queryString = "";
foreach (var key in parameters.AllKeys)
{
foreach (var value in parameters.GetValues(key))
{
queryString = QueryHelpers.AddQueryString(queryString, key, value);
}
};
return queryString.TrimStart('?');
}
This did the trick for me:
public ActionResult SetLanguage(string language = "fr_FR")
{
Request.UrlReferrer.TryReadQueryAs(out RouteValueDictionary parameters);
parameters["language"] = language;
return RedirectToAction("Index", parameters);
}
You can use.
var ur = new Uri("/page",UriKind.Relative);
if this nv is of type string you can append to the uri first parameter.
Like
var ur2 = new Uri("/page?"+nv.ToString(),UriKind.Relative);
I'm building/updating an EntityFramework EntityObject on runtime. I want to set the properties of the entity class, property names and values are coming from another source.
So I'm doing this;
public static EntityCollection<T> UpdateLocaleEntity<T>(EntityCollection<T> entityCollectionToUpdate, params ILocaleControl[] values) where T : EntityObject
{
foreach (var x in entityCollectionToUpdate)
{
Type t = typeof(T);
dynamic localeEntity = x;
string cultureCode = localeEntity.CultureCode;
for (int j = 0; j < values.Length; j++)
{
var value = values[j].GetLocaleValue(cultureCode);
t.GetProperty(values[j].EntityPropertyName).SetValue(localeEntity, value, null);
}
}
return entityCollectionToUpdate;
}
So, how can I get rid of "t.GetProperty(values[j].EntityPropertyName).SetValue(localeEntity, value, null);" part, is there a dynamic way of doing this?
Something like;
dynamicCastedLocaleEntity.GetProperty(values[j].EntityPropertyName) = value;
Thanks.
Long answer coming up.
Reflection is great in many situations, horrible in some but in almost all cases it's slow.
There are at least 4 different ways to set a property in .NET without having to use reflection.
I thought I demonstrate one of them: Using compiled expression trees. Note that the expression building is rather expensive too so that's why it's very important to cache the delegate one builds with it in a dictionary (for instance):
Expression Trees was introduced in .NET35 and is used for many things. Here I use them to build a property setter expression and then compile it into a delegate.
The example demonstrates different timing for the different cases but here are my numbers:
Control case (hard coded): 0.02s
Reflection: 1.78s
Expression Tree: 0.06s
using System;
using System.Linq.Expressions;
namespace DifferentPropertSetterStrategies
{
class TestClass
{
public string XY
{
get;
set;
}
}
class DelegateFactory
{
public static Action<object, object> GenerateSetPropertyActionForControl(
)
{
return (inst, val) => ((TestClass) inst).XY = (string) val;
}
public static Action<object, object> GenerateSetPropertyActionWithReflection(
Type type,
string property
)
{
var propertyInfo = type.GetProperty(property);
return (inst, val) => propertyInfo.SetValue (inst, val, null);
}
public static Action<object,object> GenerateSetPropertyActionWithLinqExpression (
Type type,
string property
)
{
var propertyInfo = type.GetProperty(property);
var propertyType = propertyInfo.PropertyType;
var instanceParameter = Expression.Parameter(typeof(object), "instance");
var valueParameter = Expression.Parameter(typeof(object), "value");
var lambda = Expression.Lambda<Action<object, object>> (
Expression.Assign (
Expression.Property (Expression.Convert (instanceParameter, type), propertyInfo),
Expression.Convert(valueParameter, propertyType)),
instanceParameter,
valueParameter
);
return lambda.Compile();
}
}
static class Program
{
static void Time (
string tag,
object instance,
object value,
Action<object, object > action
)
{
// Cold run
action(instance, value);
var then = DateTime.Now;
const int Count = 2000000;
for (var iter = 0; iter < Count; ++iter)
{
action (instance, value);
}
var diff = DateTime.Now - then;
Console.WriteLine ("{0} {1} times - {2:0.00}s", tag, Count, diff.TotalSeconds);
}
static void Main(string[] args)
{
var instance = new TestClass ();
var instanceType = instance.GetType ();
const string TestProperty = "XY";
const string TestValue = "Test";
// Control case which just uses a hard coded delegate
Time(
"Control",
instance,
TestValue,
DelegateFactory.GenerateSetPropertyActionForControl ()
);
Time(
"Reflection",
instance,
TestValue,
DelegateFactory.GenerateSetPropertyActionWithReflection (instanceType, TestProperty)
);
Time(
"Expression Trees",
instance,
TestValue,
DelegateFactory.GenerateSetPropertyActionWithLinqExpression(instanceType, TestProperty)
);
Console.ReadKey();
}
}
}
For FuleSnabel's answer, you can speed it up a lot (sometimes twice as fast in my tests). In some tests, it was just as fast as the Control solution:
public static Action<Object,Object> GenerateSetPropertyActionWithLinqExpression2(Type type, String property) {
PropertyInfo pi = type.GetProperty(property,BindingFlags.Instance|BindingFlags.Public);
MethodInfo mi = pi.GetSetMethod();
Type propertyType = pi.PropertyType;
var instance = Expression.Parameter(typeof(Object), "instance");
var value = Expression.Parameter(typeof(Object), "value");
var instance2 = Expression.Convert(instance, type);
var value2 = Expression.Convert(value, pi.PropertyType);
var callExpr = Expression.Call(instance2, mi, value2);
return Expression.Lambda<Action<Object,Object>>(callExpr, instance, value).Compile();
}
possibly not with EntityObject, but if you've had an ExpandoObject than you can do
dynamic entity = new ExpandoObject();
(entity as IDictionary<String, Object>)[values[j].EntityPropertyName] = value
The open source framework ImpromptuInterface has methods to invoke based on a string using the DLR rather than reflection and runs faster than reflection too.
Impromptu.InvokeSet(localeEntity, values[j].EntityPropertyName,value);
I'm afraid not. Any use of a dynamic object is baked-in at compile time. Any call which could vary at run-time has to be done using reflection.