I am trying to learn Backbone Marionette. I have created a sample application here. I am using jquery, bootstrap, requirejs, backbone, marionette etc.
My routing configuration is like:
appRoutes: {
"": "index",
"done/:id": "done"
}
First route for main page works fine. However second route does not work if I try to navigate to say localhost:8001/#done/2. Again it works when I try to navigate to say localhost:8001/##done/2. [Observe ## here]
Appreciate any help on this.
Can't say for sure, but try setting your routes as
appRoutes: {
"index": "index",
"done/:id": "done"
}
My influence is too low to comment, but if you also could tell me how it is failing at #done/2 (i.e. is it just loading the main page?)
EDIT
Is backbone.history.started?
I use coffeescript and use this:
App.on "start", ->
Backbone.history.start() unless Backbone.history.started
Related
I'm trying to setup a simple routing system based on convention.
My app will have this structure
Http
--Controllers
----Admin
------User.php
----Books
------Add.php
----etc...
I want to be able to add new Folders and controllers without adding routes manually to the web.php file.
For example I want the route to respond to /Admin/User URL with User.php controller.
I'm trying something like this, but I don't understand how to write the internal router...
Route::any('/{module}/{action?}', function($module, $action = 'index') {
Route::get('*',$module.'\'.$action.'#index' );
});
It seems that Rout:get('*'... never matches.
PS the controller namespace is correct and I reloaded with composer.
The controller works if called harcoded.
I tried also to escape '\'
$r=$module.'\\'.$action.'\\'.$action.'Ctl#index';
Route::get('/',$r );
But no result. The route is intercepted but nothing i served
It seems I came up with this
Route::get('/{module}/{action}', function($module,$action) {
return App::make('\App\Http\Controllers\\'
.$module.'\\'.$action)->callAction('index', []);
});
Any other better way?
So I am brand new to .net. I am learning .net core right now. I am trying to figure out routing. I can not seem to get the routing to look in any folder except Home and Shared. I have looked all over the internet and tried many things. There seems to be something I am missing. Here is what I got
app.UseMvc(routes =>
{
routes.MapRoute(
name: "test",
template: "Register/test",
defaults: new { controller = "Register", action = "test"}
);
routes.MapRoute(
name: "default",
template: "{controller=Home}/{action=Index}/{id?}");
});
I have a Register folder with a test.cshtml file in just to try t figure this routing out. And this is is in my HomeController.cs file
public IActionResult test()
{
return View();
}
on my _Layout page I have this link
<li><a asp-area="" asp-controller="Register" asp-action="test">Test</a></li>
It works fine when I put it in the home folder, but I want to keep things separate. I know there is something I am missing. I've poured through all kinds on articles online including Stack Overflow, and I just don't understand what I am missing. From what I read its suppose to be like the Parent folder/File/ then and id that may be attached to that like a user name I have tried other formats for the routing with no luck, this was just my most recent attempt. I just can't help but think I need some bit of code somewhere else.
From your question it looks like you have the following code in your HomeController.
public IActionResult test()
{
return View();
}
That actually belongs in your RegisterController because the route template you defined is an explicit capture with defaults to the "Register" controller and the "test" action.
The view called "test.cshtml" - which should be named as such because of the default convention - should reside in your \Views\Register folder, next door to \Views\Home.
There are a couple of reasons why this may have worked in some fashion. First, the view is discoverable for any controller if it's in shared. Without knowing more about the requests you tried, it's difficult to determine if routing kicked in on the first route or second, but if that method was truly on HomeController requests to /home/test would have worked.
It looks to me like you're exploring routing. That is great - I 100% encourage the experimentation - so long as you know that routing isn't necessarily the lowest hanging fruit to learn. It's also something that you shouldn't have to touch 93.7% of the time. For example, the route you have defined about wouldn't be required for the controller and action you're adding with RegisterController and test.
Cheers.
So I’m looking to make some routes within my super cool can.js application. Aiming for something like this…
#!claims ClaimsController - lists claims
#!claims/:id ClaimController - views a single claim
#!claims/new ClaimController - creates a new claim
#!claims/:id/pdf - do nothing, the ClaimController will handle it
#!admin AdminController - loads my Administrative panel with menu
#!admin/users - do nothing, the AdminController will handle it
#!admin/settings - do nothing, the AdminController will handle it
So how might we do this?
“claims route”: function() { load('ClaimsController'); },
“claims/:id route”: function() { load('ClaimController'); },
“admin”: function() { load(‘AdminController’); },
Cool beans, we’re off. So what if someone sends a link to someone like...
http://myapp#!claims/1/pdf
Nothing happens! Ok, well let’s add the route.
“claims/:id/pdf route”: function() { load('ClaimController'); },
Great. Now that link works. Here, the router’s job is only to load the controller. The controller will recognize that the pdf action is wanted, and show the correct view.
So pretend I’ve loaded up a claim claims/:id and I edit one or two things. Then I click the Print Preview button to view the PDF and change my route to claims/:id/pdf.
What should happen… the Claim Controller is watching the route and shows the pdf view.
What actually happens… the router sees the change, matches the claims/:id/pdf route we added, and reloads the Claim Controller, displaying a fresh version of the claim pulled from the server/cache, losing my changes.
To try and define the problem, I need the router to identify when the route changes, what controller the route belongs to, and if the controller is already loaded, ignore it. But this is hard!
claims //
claims/:id // different controllers!
claims/:id //
claims/:id/pdf // same controller!
We could just bind on the "controller" change. So defining routes like can.route(':controller') and binding on :controller.
{can.route} controller
// or
can.route.bind('controller', function() {...})
But clicking on a claim (changing from ClaimsController to ClaimController) won't trigger, as the first token claim is the same in both cases.
Is there a convention I can lean on? Should I be specifying every single route in the app and checking if the controller is loaded? Are my preferred route urls just not working?
The following is how I setup routing in complex CanJS applications. You can see an example of this here.
First, do not use can.Control routes. It's an anti-pattern and will be removed in 3.0 for something like the ideas in this issue.
Instead you setup a routing app module that imports and sets up modules by convention similar to this which is used here.
I will explain how to setup a routing app module in a moment. But first, it's important to understand how can.route is different from how you are probably used to thinking of routing. Its difference makes it difficult to understand at first, but once you get it; you'll hopefully see how powerful and perfect it is for client-side routing.
Instead of thinking of urls, think of can.route's data. What is in can.route.attr(). For example, your URLs seem to have data like:
page - the primary area someone is dealing with
subpage - an optional secondary area within the page
id - the id of a type
For example, admin/users might want can.route.attr() to return:
{page: "admin", subpage: "users"}
And, claims/5 might translate into:
{page: "claims", id: "5"}
When I start building an application, I only use urls that look like #!page=admin&subpage=users and ignore the pretty routing until later. I build an application around state first and foremost.
Once I have the mental picture of the can.route.attr() data that encapsulates my application's state, I build a routing app module that listens to changes in can.route and sets up the right controls or components. Yours might look like:
can.route.bind("change", throttle(function(){
if( can.route.attr("page") == "admin" ) {
load("AdminController")
} else if(can.route.attr("page") === "claims" && can.route.attr("id") {
load("ClaimController")
} else if ( ... ) {
...
} else {
// by convention, load a controller for whatever page is
load(can.capitalize(can.route.attr("page")+"Controller")
}
}) );
Finally, after setting all of that up, I make my pretty routes map to my expected can.route.attr() values:
can.route(":page"); // for #!claims, #!admin
can.route("claims/new", {page: "claims", subpage: "new"});
can.route("claims/:id", {page: "claims"});
can.route("admin/:subpage",{page: "admin"});
By doing it this way, you keep your routes independent of rest of the application. Everything simply listens to changes in can.route's attributes. All your routing rules are maintained in one place.
I want to organize my views in packages / folders to avoid a long list. With the (great) new router, a view is provided by default that we can change by creating a new one with a convention name. For example:
match('/').to('home');
uses:
"home" handlebars template
App.HomeView
App.HomeController
Now I want to use:
"my_package/home" handlebars template (works)
App.MyPackage.HomeView
App.MyPackage.HomeController
When I use the gem "ember-rails" (the GIT version) and the generator:
rails g ember:view my_package/home
I get:
DemoEmberRails.MyPackage::HomeView = Ember.View.extend({
});
that is not a correct javascript code (seems to be an extract for ruby code).
I tried:
DemoEmberRails.MyPackage = {};
DemoEmberRails.MyPackage.HomeView = Ember.View.extend({
});
But it's not used by the router.
How to do that?
I think you should Namespace them using Ember.Namespace. I'm still not sure if the router will automatically search namespaces but it may?
http://emberjs.com/api/classes/Ember.Namespace.html
As you've said
match('/').to('home');
expects AppName.HomeRoute, AppName.HomeView and AppName.HomeController. So if you have a template with data-template-name="home" and a view similar to
AppName.HomeView = Ember.View.extend({
teplateName: 'home'
});
then ember will automatically connect the / route with this view.
The new ember routing guides are quite helpful here.
It looks like this is currently unsupported, however, a pull request exists to add this feature.
See:
https://github.com/emberjs/ember.js/pull/1679
Using T4MVC on my new MVC Razor Project and I will have an action link like so
#Html.ActionLink(ViewRes.SharedStrings.HomeLink, MVC.Home.Views.Index, null, new { rel = "dropmenu7" })
so i would expect a url like
http://localhost:52122/Home/Index
but what i am getting is
http://localhost:52122/Home/~/Views/Home/Index.cshtml
looking into the t4mvc template file, i see where the "~/Views/Home/Index.cshtml" is coming from but I dont wanna touch it because it was made that way and i would guess i shouldnt have to change anything there.
Asking a friend, he says that i should use RouteLink instead of ActionLink because i am sometimes going to locations outside of the controller. However when i do that, i get: "A route named '~/Views/Home/Index.cshtml' could not be found in the route collection." when i try to run the app.
I guess i should also note that the links i am using are in the _Layout.cshtml
What am i doing wrong?
You need to change 'MVC.Home.Views.Index' to 'MVC.Home.Index()':
#Html.ActionLink(ViewRes.SharedStrings.HomeLink, MVC.Home.Index(), null, new { rel = "dropmenu7" })