ScottGu's Blog - All Comments

2008 ??? vs. ????????? 3.5 ?????? 2??? ???????????? ???????????? ?????? _. · ??? ?????????, ????????? ??????

Fri, 05 Sep 2008 06:38:14 GMT

Pingback from 2008 ??? vs. ????????? 3.5 ?????? 2??? ???????????? ???????????? ?????? _. · ??? ?????????, ????????? ??????

re: Quick Update

aspAnn — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:24:34 GMT

Good News

Thanks Scottgu !

re: ASP.NET MVC Preview 5 and Form Posting Scenarios

defaultexp — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:14:42 GMT

It's great, I want to see the release version of ASP .NET MVC as soom as possible!

re: ASP.NET MVC Preview 5 and Form Posting Scenarios

Adam Carasso — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:13:58 GMT

In the 4th screen shot shouldn't the form action be /Products/Save, not /Products/Create? In any case I have loved using ASP.NET MVC and look forward to upgrading.

--Adam Carasso

re: ASP.NET MVC Preview 5 and Form Posting Scenarios

Areg Sarkissian — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 20:39:31 GMT

Thanks for the update I was happy to see a TryUpdateModel version was included, which I was advocating. Thanks for that as well.

Also I liked the overload on ValidationMessage() that allows for a custom error message. Can we also get an overload on VaidationSummary() in the form of

VaidationSummary(Dictionary<string /*FormFieldName*/,string /*CustomBindingError*/>)

So that we can specify custom errors for binding errors on form fields such as the conversion of integer or decimal strings, when we use VaidationSummary instead of ValidationMessage to display the error.

Thanks for a great post and all your and the MVC teams efforts.

One note: Your previous suggestion to bind all Model fields using

UpdateModel(c.Address, Request.Form.AllKeys, "Address")

should be something like

UpdateModel(c.Address, c.AllWritablePropertyNames, "Address") instead, as you don't want to bind all form elements.

Obviously this would require the developer defining an AllWritablePropertyNames property on models,

which could be implemented as a Base Class that all models derive from.

re: ASP.NET MVC Preview 5 and Form Posting Scenarios

Mark Leistner — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 19:01:13 GMT

Nevermind my previous question on nullable parameters. I answered my own question.

I had model binding setup using ComplexModelBinder for the default binder, and int? is a complex type... so it was trying to use the binder for it and not working as expected.

Thanks for the great resource on all things ASP.Net

re: ASP.NET MVC Preview 5 and Form Posting Scenarios

Brian Lowry — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 18:57:02 GMT

I may have missed a comment about this, but I was curious as to why the attributes take string values, and not Enum flags (Post | Get). I like to avoid string with teeth whenever possible, and since verbs aren't going to change much, I don't see the reason for strings.

Is there a reason for this?

re: ASP.NET MVC Preview 5 and Form Posting Scenarios

exptrade2000 — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 18:39:29 GMT

UpdateModel method requires that the keys be provided. So if I want to update every single property on the instance of the object, I have to specify every key, right? Would it be possible to have UpdateModel overload that does not require any keys to be passed but to instead uses properties as keys and tries to find appropriate form entry. In other words update every property for which I have a form field.

re: ASP.NET MVC Preview 5 and Form Posting Scenarios

Mark Leistner — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 18:37:52 GMT

Does mapping to a controller action with a nullable type parameter still work? I've been unable to get it working with a nullable int, but it works fine with a string or an int.

public ActionResult Test(int? id)

/SomeController/Test/123 returns null.

Am I missing something?

re: ASP.NET MVC Preview 5 and Form Posting Scenarios

Chris Hughes — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:49:17 GMT

I've downloaded MVC preview 5 and experimenting with this concept. It looks great, but I have one question about ModelBinding:

It seems you can only define the Model serialization method on the object itself by overriding ToString, or implementing IFormattable/IConvertible (correct me if I am wrong). I am however in the situation that I am using a Business Object layer in a different assembly and I want to serialize these objects so that I can use ModelBinding. Because they are in a different assembly I can't use partial classes. Is there a workaround for this? A nice solution would be if you could override the serialization on the ModelBinder class itself, then both the serialization and deserialization logic would be in the same place and it would be available to any object you put in it.

Chris