Most times when using DevEx MVC extensions, I find myself having to use repetitive code to generate the controls/layouts that I use on a regular basis. For example, I tend to prefer left-aligned captions to controls. Ideally, I'd be able to do something like this and have it "just work":
#Html.DevExpress().TextBoxFor(m => m.Notes).GetHtml()
However, in order to place the caption on the left, I need to also pass in a settings object for it, or dome something much more verbose such as:
#Html.DevExpress().TextBox(
s => {
// ...
s.Properties.CaptionCellStyle.Width = 100;
// ...
}
).Bind(Model.Notes).GetHtml()
What I thought to do was create my own set of extensions that would wrap the DevEx extensions, giving me some sort of common/core customization layer, so I could do something like this:
#Html.MyComponents().TextBoxFor(m => m.Notes)
This call would in turn call the DevExpress TextBoxExtension with a common set of settings and output the DevEx textbox as desired.
I've worked this up via custom html extensions (code below), but have two issues with this basic implementation:
The control renders at the very top of the Body element, not at the position in which it's placed in the view, and
There's a JavaScript error "ASPxClientTextBox" is not defined (this is part of the client-side scripting that DevEx uses with their controls).
I was hoping this would be an easy "wrap it and go" type of scenario. Is there some basic concept of these custom HTML extensions that I'm missing? Or does anyone know if this is a general limitation in trying to wrap another company's pre-existing extensions?
Here's the code I have implemented (which is not yet fully fleshed out, just trying for proof of concept here):
public static class HtmlHelpers
{
public static MyComponentsHtmlHelpers<TModel> MyComponents<TModel>(this HtmlHelper<TModel> html) {
return new MyComponentsHtmlHelpers<TModel>(html);
}
}
public class MyComponentsHtmlHelpers<TModel>
{
private HtmlHelper<TModel> html;
public MyComponentsHtmlHelpers(HtmlHelper<TModel> html) {
this.html = html;
}
public MvcHtmlString TextBoxFor<TValue>(Expression<Func<TModel, TValue>> expression) {
var data = ModelMetadata.FromLambdaExpression(expression, html.ViewData);
string propertyName = data.PropertyName;
System.Diagnostics.Debug.WriteLine("PROPERTY NAME: " + propertyName);
TextBoxSettings s = new TextBoxSettings();
s.Name = "textbox_" + propertyName;
s.Properties.Caption = propertyName;
s.Properties.CaptionCellStyle.Width = 100;
TextBoxExtension tb = new TextBoxExtension(s);
return tb.GetHtml();
}
}
Nevermind - cleaning the solution and rebuilding as well as force refreshing the test browser a few times and ensure there's no cache and... now everything works as intended.
(not sure if I ought to delete this question or leave it around in case someone wants to attempt the same... I'll leave it for now, feel free to remove)
Related
I'm translating a web application and things are generally going smoothly with wicket:message and properties files. But Wicket always wants to have a component for looking up strings.
How can I translate converters and renderers (i.e. implementations of IConverter and IChoiceRenderer) which don't have access to any Wicket component in their methods?
So far I found one way - Application.get().getResourceSettings().getLocalizer().getString(key, null) - but I have to make the strings "global", i.e. associated with the application class. That's not nice for separation and reuse. How can I do it better?
I think you should invent you own way how to achieve this. Here in my current project we registered our own IStringResourceLoader like this:
IStringResourceLoader stringResourceLoader = new OurOwnResourceLoaderImpl();
Application.get().getResourceSettings().getStringResourceLoaders().add(stringResourceLoader);
Then for example in IChoiceRenderer we just call Application.get().getLocalizer().getString("key", null).
Inside our IStringResourceLoader we are looking for bundles (property files) with some string pattern according our own conventions.
Or you can just register localization bundle (ie. properties file) distributed inside your library's jar in Application#init through org.apache.wicket.resource.loader.BundleStringResourceLoader.
Afaik there is no standard way to do that so it's up to you what path you choose.
Updated:
I found another solution how your library/extension can register it's own localization by itself so you needn't to touch Application#init or create your own IStringResourceLoaders.
There is preregistered string resource loader org.apache.wicket.resource.loader.InitializerStringResourceLoader (see wickets default IResourceSetting implementation ie. ResourceSetting and it's constructor) which uses wicket's Initializer mechanism - see IInitializer javadoc - basically you add wicket.properties file in your jar class root (ie. it is in default/none package) and inside file there is:
initializer=i.am.robot.MyInitilizer
then i.am.robot.MyInitilizer:
public class MyInitializer implements IInitializer {
/**
* #param application
* The application loading the component
*/
void init(Application application) {
// do whatever want
}
/**
* #param application
* The application loading the component
*/
void destroy(Application application) {
}
}
and now you create your localization bundles in same package and same name as IInitializer implementation (in our example MyInitializer)
I think I found another way...
I noticed that IStringResourceLoader also has a method String loadStringResource(Class<?> clazz, String key, Locale locale, String style); (and one more parameter for variation in newer Wicket versions) which does not require a component. clazz is supposed to be a component class, but... it doesn't actually have to be :)
I was able to implement my own class MyLocalizer extends Localizer with a new method
getString(String key, Class<?> cl, IModel<?> model, Locale locale, String defaultValue)
which works in a similar way to
getString(String key, Component component, IModel<?> model, String defaultValue)
but uses the class directly instead of a component. It still uses the same properties cache and resource loaders.
Then I wrote an abstract class MyConverter implements IConverter which has a MyLocalizer getLocalizer() and a few getString methods like the Component class. Basically it does getLocalizer().getString(key, getClass(), model, locale, defaultValue), so the properties can now be attached to the converter class.
Seems to work :)
If I understand your question...
You can use package based properties that means if you put your keys/values into a property file 'package.properties' in a package. Each localized resource of any subpackage under that package returns the value associated to the requested key until you override it in another property file.
The file name is 'package.properties' in Wicket prior to 1.6.x and 'wicket-package.properties' in Wicket 1.6+
See
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/WICKET/Migration+to+Wicket+6.0#MigrationtoWicket6.0-package.propertiesrenamedtowicket-package.properties
However it works just for componet, outside the componet (when component argument is null), it is possible to use:
WicketApplication.properties (the WebApplication class is WicketApplication.class, this property file is in the same package).
applicationGlobalProperty=My Global Localized Property
wicket-package.properties (package based, place it in the same package as the page)
localText=Localized text: A local component text based on wicket-package.properties
LocalizedPage.html (markup template)
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta charset="UTF-8">
<title>Localized Page</title>
</head>
<body xmlns:wicket="http://wicket.apache.org">
<div>
<div>
<h2>Texts</h2>
<div>
<wicket:message key="localText"/> <br/>
<span wicket:id="localizedLabel"></span>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>
LocalizePage.java (code)
public class LocalizedPage extends WebPage {
private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;
public LocalizedPage() {
super();
}
#Override
protected void onInitialize() {
super.onInitialize();
add(new Label("localizedLabel", new AbstractReadOnlyModel<String>() {
private static final long serialVersionUID = 1L;
#Override
public String getObject() {
return WicketApplication.get().getResourceSettings().getLocalizer().getString("applicationGlobalProperty", null);
}
}));
}
}
See the full example on https://repo.twinstone.org/projects/WISTF/repos/wicket-examples-6.x/browse
How are you supposed to conditionally display menu items based on roles in the Bootstrap Sample project? I was thinking of doing the following
Implement INavigatonRouteFilter - really just implementing the shouldRemove(Route navigationRoutes) method - by getting the default controller/action for the route and seeing if the user is authorized
Call NavigationRoutes.Filters.Add(myAuthorizationFilter) after configuring the NavigationRoutes in App_Start
There are two problems I see with this approach:
I don't actually know how to do the first step unless I add in a bunch of conditional statements to check for Controller's name explicitly
This seems like it could make NavigationRoutes.Filters very hard to deal with once there are a lot of filters or a desire for more modularity later on
I don't know that I've explained the problem clearly enough, but basically I want to use what is provided in the Bootstrap sample to implement authorization-based navigation menu display if at all possible. Using INavigationRouteFilter just seemed like the most natural way to do so.
For those looking for an answer or at least a quick fix.
Here's what I've come up with after 5 minutes and I most certainly haven't though about any side effects this may have.
routes.MapNavigationRoute<HomeController>("Index", c => c.Index())
.FilterRoute(() => !WebSecurity.IsAuthenticated);
You can either do all your filtering in your call to FilterRoute() or you can add more extension methods to save you some characters.
I'm thinking of .RequireRole("Adiministrators"); that calls WebSecurity.RequireRoles() in turn (or HttpContext.Current.User.IsInRole()) etc.
public static NavigationRouteBuilder FilterRoute(this NavigationRouteBuilder builder, Func<bool> func)
{
var currentRoute = builder._parent;
NavigationRoutes.Filters.Add(new BootstrapAuthorizationFilter(builder, x =>
{
if (x == currentRoute)
return func();
else
return false;
}));
return builder;
}
and BootstrapAuthorizationFilter is just a class implementing INavigationRouteFilter that calls func() in its ShouldRemove() method
public class BootstrapAuthorizationFilter : INavigationRouteFilter
{
private NavigationRouteBuilder builder;
private Func<NamedRoute, bool> func;
public BootstrapAuthorizationFilter(NavigationRouteBuilder builder, Func<NamedRoute, bool> func)
{
this.builder = builder;
this.func = func;
}
public bool ShouldRemove(Route navigationRoutes)
{
if (navigationRoutes is NamedRoute)
return func(navigationRoutes as NamedRoute);
return false;
}
}
Clearly nothing fancy and I'm not sure if I'd use it in production.
But I think is simple enough and works (for the cases I tested).
Having said that, I hope the new routing functionality is going to be released soon :)
I have my target language in Session["lang"], which is either "en" or "it". I have added this to the Site.master:
<script runat="server">
void Page_Load(object sender, EventArgs e) {
string lang = Session["lang"].ToString();
System.Threading.Thread.CurrentThread.CurrentCulture = System.Globalization.CultureInfo.CreateSpecificCulture(lang);
System.Threading.Thread.CurrentThread.CurrentUICulture = System.Globalization.CultureInfo.CreateSpecificCulture(lang);
}
</script>
Then I'd like to invoke a resource string like this:
<asp:Label ID="Label1" runat="server" Text="<%$ Resources:Global, test %>"></asp:Label>
I have two files in the App_GlobalResources, named Global.resx and Global.en.resx.
The problems is that no matter what is in the lang variable, I always get the results from the main Global.resx, and I never get the english version from Global.en.resx
I am doing this wrong entirely??
I tried putting the System.Threading... part in the Application_PreRequestHandlerExecute method in Global.asax.cs but the result was the same.
Thanks
PS: I am asking about a way to make this work in a simple way. If I was to use the complicate way, I'd go with this: http://helios.ca/2009/05/27/aspnet-mvc-and-localization/
i had the same dilema(how to implement localization) in my asp.net mvc app.
I followed the instructions posted here and it works like a charm.
So i created a folder named Localization under Content and then i create Resources resx files for each language i want to translate. Keep in mind that there is a convention for the resx file names. ie
Resources.resx is the default fall back for everything.
Resources.en-GB.resx is for english GB
Resources.en-US.resx is for english US
etc.
Just make sure you follow the instructions posted in the link to embed and make the Resources available in all places in your app (views, controllers etc)
Edit:
I want to add that i ommited this line from web.config since i wanted to manually set the local from my app.
<globalization uiCulture="auto" culture="auto"/>
Instead i have created the following class:
public class SmartController : Controller
{
public SmartController()
{
System.Threading.Thread.CurrentThread.CurrentCulture = CultureInfo.GetCultureInfo("en-US");
System.Threading.Thread.CurrentThread.CurrentUICulture = CultureInfo.GetCultureInfo("en-US");
}
}
All controllers inherit from this class.
Since this is an administrative set of the locale i have to set it from my apps settings. You could read it from Cookies and set it, or otherwise. This is imo the simplest solution for localization that i have encountered so far.
Once implemented you can refer to any string you add by the following simple line of code, no extra code needed.
<%= Resources.Strings.TranslatedTerm %>
I bet this one is a duplicate.
Anyway - all you need is here (assuming that you are using webforms viewengine (might work with others too, haven't investigated)).
Oh well... here goes my 'summary':
Helpers are just a part. You need to do some modifications with your default view engine too . On createview/createpartialview it should return localizationwebformview which adds a path key to viewdata which is used by htmlhelper to find resourceexpressionsfields and pass them to localizationhelpers class which retrieves desired value.
Little bonus=>
This might be handy if you don't want to recreate resource folders for view subfolders
(in case you modify viewengine.view/partialviewlocationformats):
private static string ReformatVirtualPath(string virtualPath)
{
//This allows NOT to duplicate App_localResources directory
// ~/Views/Shared/Partial/Some/BulltihS/_View.ascx
// turns into =>
// ~/Views/Shared/_View.ascx
var start = #"(~(/?\w*/?){2})";
var end = #"(\w*.as(c|p)x)";
start = Regex.Match(virtualPath, start).Value;
end = Regex.Match(virtualPath, end).Value;
return start + end;
}
usage:
internal static ResourceExpressionFields GetResourceFields
(string expression, string virtualPath)
{
virtualPath = ReformatVirtualPath(virtualPath);
var context = new ExpressionBuilderContext(virtualPath);
var builder = new ResourceExpressionBuilder();
return (ResourceExpressionFields)
builder.ParseExpression(expression, typeof(string), context);
}
EDIT:
but it might be a good idea to avoid App_GlobalResources and App_LocalResources as K. Scott Allen suggests (check Konstantinos answer).
I am attempting to create an AttachedProperty for a DataGridColumn within Silverlight 3.0 and I am having some issues.
Here is the AttachedProperty:
public class DataGridColumnHelper
{
public static readonly DependencyProperty HeaderProperty =
DependencyProperty.RegisterAttached("Header", typeof(string), typeof(DataGridColumnHelper),
new PropertyMetadata(OnHeaderPropertyChanged));
private static void OnHeaderPropertyChanged(DependencyObject d, DependencyPropertyChangedEventArgs e)
{
string header = GetHeader(d);
var dataGridColumn = d as DataGridColumn;
if (dataGridColumn == null)
{
return;
}
dataGridColumn.Header = GetHeader(dataGridColumn);
}
public static string GetHeader(DependencyObject obj)
{
return (string)obj.GetValue(HeaderProperty);
}
public static void SetHeader(DependencyObject obj, string value)
{
obj.SetValue(HeaderProperty, value);
}
}
As you can see it is really simple, I am trying to overcome the limitation that the Header Property in the DataGridColumn class cannot be bound.
This XAML works as expected...
<Controls:DataGridTextColumn Binding="{Binding OwnerName}"
HeaderStyle="{StaticResource DataGridColumnHeaderStyle}"
Behaviors:DataGridColumnHelper.Header="User Name"/>
However this XAML throws an error...(Specifically: {System.Windows.Markup.XamlParseException: AG_E_PARSER_PROPERTY_NOT_FOUND [Line: 224 Position: 112]
at System.Windows.Application.LoadComponent(Object component, Uri resourceLocator)
....})
<Controls:DataGridTextColumn Binding="{Binding OwnerName}"
HeaderStyle="{StaticResource DataGridColumnHeaderStyle}"
Behaviors:DataGridColumnHelper.Header="{Binding Resources.UserNameListViewHeading, Source={StaticResource Labels}}"/>
Just for experimentation I attached this property (with the binding syntax above) to a DataGrid and checked the DataGridColumnHelper.Header property in the OnHeaderPropertyChanged method and the value was correct (and an exception wasn't thrown)
It is my understanding that the object that the AttachedProperty is attached to must be a DependencyProperty. Looking through Reflector, DataGridColumn (from which DataGridTextColumn derives) derives from DependencyProperty.
Can somebody please shed some light on this? I am trying to Localize our application, and I am having trouble with the DataGrid. I am sure I can do this in code-behind, but I am trying to avoid that.
Chris, the problem is very simple, this won't work because the DataGridTextColumn is "detached" from the Visual Tree. Your DataGridTextColumn object is rooted in the Columns collection of the DataGrid - see the indirection. So even attached properties will not work as you expect. Now there is a way to make all this work using something I'm calling Attached Bindings, see:
http://www.orktane.com/Blog/post/2009/09/29/Introducing-nRouteToolkit-for-Silverlight-(Part-I).aspx
Just remember to attach the binding properties using something that is in the VisualTree (so the Grid holding the column would do just fine.)
Hope this helps.
Try using this, im assuming UserName is a property in your viewmodel
<Controls:DataGridTextColumn Binding="{Binding OwnerName}"
HeaderStyle="{StaticResource DataGridColumnHeaderStyle}"
Behaviors:DataGridColumnHelper.Header="{Binding UserName}"/>
I cant test your scenario so my post is just an idea. Might work, might not.
I'm new to MSpec and would like to know if the way I wrote my test for ASP.NET MVC is correct. The test passes but I don't really like the way it's written and it seems awkward. I'm certainly missing something.
public class AccountControllerTests3
{
protected static AccountController controller;
static IFormsAuthenticationService formsService;
static IMembershipService membershipService;
protected static ActionResult result;
protected static LogOnModel model;
Establish context = () =>
{
var controllerBuilder = new TestControllerBuilder();
formsService = MockRepository.GenerateStub<IFormsAuthenticationService>();
membershipService = MockRepository.GenerateStub<IMembershipService>();
model = MockRepository.GenerateStub<LogOnModel>();
controller =
controllerBuilder.CreateController<AccountController>(new object[]
{
formsService,
membershipService
});
};
Because user_logs = () =>
{
bool rememberMe = false;
membershipService.Stub(
x => x.ValidateUser("bdd", "mspec")).Return(true);
formsService.Stub(x => x.SignIn("bdd", rememberMe));
controller.ModelState.IsValid.ShouldBeTrue();
};
}
[Subject(typeof(AccountController), "LogInTests")]
public class When_logging_into_application_with_good_login_and_password : AccountControllerTests3
{
private It user_should_be_redirected_to_the_home_page = () =>
{
model.UserName = "bdd";
model.Password = "mspec";
result = controller.LogOn(model, string.Empty);
result.AssertActionRedirect().ToAction<HomeController>(
x => x.Index());
};
}
[Subject(typeof(AccountController), "LogInTests")]
public class When_logging_into_application_with_bad_login_and_password : AccountControllerTests3
{
It The_error_message_should_be_shown = () =>
{
model.UserName = "BAD";
model.Password = "BAD";
result = controller.LogOn(model, string.Empty);
controller.ModelState[""].Errors[0].ErrorMessage.ShouldEqual(
"The user name or password provided is incorrect.");
};
}
Thanks in advance,
Thomas
One of my goals when I write tests with MSpec is to get the "Assert" or the "It" down to one line. MSpec is not like NUnit in that it only executes the Context (made up of the Establish clauses from the current class and all base classes and the Because clause) once followed by all of the Specifications (It clauses).
This is designed explicitly to force you to not perform any behavior in the It clauses, but rather observe it.
What you're actually doing here is using MSpec like NUnit. Try and rewrite the tests in a single class (using no inheritance). Work backwards... in the It, place a single line that asserts what you want to assert. Perhaps the AssertRedirect. In the Because, try and put a single line that causes the observations to be observable. This would probably be your call to the controller's logon method. Finally, in the "Establish context" you'd want to put everything else.
After a while, you may want to pull some of the things in the Establish context only into a base class, but in doing so, be sure that your entire subclass stands alone in terms of understanding. A reader shouldn't need to read the base class in order to understand what the actual spec is doing. It's ok to hide ceremonial implementation details, but be sure to hide them behind descriptive method names.
There's another line I'm not sure about:
controller.ModelState.IsValid.ShouldBeTrue();
If this is a test, it should probably be in its own It clause. Though really, do you want to test this? What are you testing here? Shouldn't your controller take an action based on whether or not the model is valid? Shouldn't the result of that action be observable (validation error instead of login error). I just wonder if you really need to test this.
A few other things to check out, first for styling with R#, it seems your tests are falling victim to R#'s defaults. I posted about how to fight this here:
http://codebetter.com/blogs/aaron.jensen/archive/2008/10/19/getting-resharper-and-vs-to-play-nice-with-mspec.aspx
Also, James Broome has some nice MVC MSpec extensions that are worth checking out:
http://jamesbroo.me/introducing-machinespecificationsmvc/
Good luck and Enjoy! Feel free to ping me on twitter if you have any other unrelated questions.
Here's a remark: instead of using CreateController method use InitializeController, because it is compile-time safer and refactor friendlier.
Instead of:
controller = controllerBuilder.CreateController<AccountController>(
new object[] { formsService, membershipService });
Do:
controller = new AccountController(formsService, membershipService);
controllerBuilder.InitializeController(controller);
The first will still compile if you change the controller constructor arguments and it will blow at runtime, while the second will generate a compile-time error.