We are trying different JavaScript libraries. The one I just completed is Sencho Ext JS and it is pretty much everything. It has controls, a MVC framework, data handlers, etc. I'm diving into Kendo and it looks like it is mostly UI controls, working with JQuery.
Is this correct? And if so, for the MVC framework & data binding, is there any libraries that work best with Kendo?
Kendo UI includes
UI Widgets
MVVM Framework (client-side)
SPA Framework
It also has an ASP.NET MVC Server Wrappers available as an optional package (that is also an additional cost). This provides a .NET library that can be used to add server-side data paging, filtering, and sorting to your MVC controller actions. This works best if you are using Linq queries (or Entity Framework). It also provides a set of Razor functions that can generate the JavaScript to initialize Kendo UI widgets.
For an example of the MVC Server Wrappers in use, have a look at the Sales Hub sample project.
Sales Hub live site
Sales Hub source code (GitHub)
Though, to be honest, I recommend just using JavaScript to init the widgets instead of the Razor helper functions. However the DataSourceRequest and DataSourceResponse classes provided by the MVC server wrappers are very useful.
Related
I am currently studying Java EE with Hibernate for a project. In The Web App I am creating I am planning to Ajaxify page contents, and Site wide audio player(Which I think would be implemented using AJAX).
I am using a JSP based MVC, no frameworks, Just Java EE and Hibernate. And I've heard that I need to use a Framework like JSF to be able to AJaxify may web-app. How true is this? Do I really need to learn JSF or other frameworks to be able to Ajaxify my web app? As much as possible I do not want to learn a new framework for now since it is a big learning curve. but if there's no other way to Ajaxify my web app, I'll study a framework.
You don't have to adopt any framework to use partial page updates and similar, you can construct and send requests "manually" with JavaScript, but this is much more tedious then using a framework like JSF, maybe coupled with a component library like primefaces.
EDIT: you can find an abundance of examples of ajax capabilities in the primefaces showcase. Primefaces uses JQuery internally.
EDIT2: I have found some resources on how to dispatch ajax requests with JQuery from a JSP page (I assumed that using JSP was almost equal to not using a framework ;)): here and here. I hope this is what you were looking for.
To add on #Kostja's answer -
I totally agree with him, with Ajax you just need to have a servlet to handle the HTTP requests, and proper JavaScript code.
Besides JSF,I would also consider to look at Apache Wicket - you can read here how Wicket handles Ajax.
The reason I'm suggesting Wicket is that it's more comfortable to some developers to work with somewhat more "component oriented" (swing-like) framework.
If I need to build a web application that implement functionalities related to managing an Medical hospital institution. That application include functionalities to add, update, delete, search and retrieve patients, medical visits, etc.
So I am confused on which approach to follow inside my ASP.NET MVC web application, either to have my controller classes inside my asp.net MVC.
Derived from IController to perform the CRUD operation
OR
Derived from ApiController to perform the CRUD operations
SECOND question is there an approach that is taking over the other, and what are the advantages/disadvantages of each approach over the other?
You can absolutely use both. Nothing stops you to use good old Controller to do CRUD in JSON and MVC is capable of doing it. However, you do not get all the nice features of Web API such as content negotiation, message handlers, media type formatters, etc.
If you do not need any of Web API specific features, then use MVC. But on the long run, Web API will be a better investment as I believe adoption will rocket soon.
If you are going to generate classical HTML pages from your controllers, use the MVC ones. If what you want to return to a client is some kind of serialized data (XML, JSON, ...), use Web API controllers since these make it easier, regarding e.g. content negotiation.
See also Getting started with Web API
I am trying to build set of reusable components for the ASP.Net MVC3 application.
Each component is consisted of it's own model, view and controller.
The interaction between components should be solved using mediator "like" pattern.
Since the components are higher level concept (abstraction) and not "real" objects (technically component is short-lived bunch consisted of a model, view and controller functions), it is probably tricky to implement
mediator pattern.
I need good ideas how to technically implement mediator interaction between components using ASP.Net MVC3 and AJAX?
My initial question with initial problem: MVC modular GUI components
I would keep the controllers and views as simple and possible and create a service layer where all the interactions with other components and logic sits. Also I would create a separate project for the services layer so if you want to build different types of interfaces ( phone apps etc ) you can still use the same services layer. This would also enable some automated testing to check on the logic and interaction between your components. Hope this helps.
I have some knowledge about Flex and Java EE, they are good for web application development. Anyway when I try to write a typical web page that is based on HTML/CSS/Javascript, I think I should take a look at some new program language/framework.
I heard much good news about grails and finally decided to learn it instead of python, ruby, scale… But I still don’t have an overview of the whole structure. Grails is a backend framework like php, jsp, jsf right? So that probably means, it’s a replacement of Java EE in backend, then how about the frontend (need ajax functionality), what are people using with grails?
thanks
Grails is not a replacement, it is an abstraction around the tradition Java EE stack and some extremely popular libraries like Spring and Hibernate, that allows you to go faster by using "convention over configuration".
One component of Grails is GSPs, groovy server pages, which is a front end technology, the V in the MVC (Model View Controller) paradigm. You also have Domain Objects, which are the M (Model), and Controllers, which are the C. Grails also has Services which are best put into the M category (IMHO) of the MVC paradigm. So the Model arrangement in Grails gives you relatively easy persistence (using hibernate under the covers), the Services give you great reusability in your business and transactional logic, and the Controller simply invoke the right logic for a given request, and return the response.
One part of that response is what gets displayed on the screen. In a simple webapp, GSPs fill that role -- the controller tells the browser to render a specific GSP which has data bound to it from the service method that was invoked in the controller. However, it is easy to have the controller return json, so if the endpoint bound to the controller is an ajax request, the client can handle the response itself.
You can use any front end technology you want in a grails app. The default is GSPs, which is an extension of JSPs, which are part of the traditional java stack, but you can use jQuery, Sencha, Sproutcore, Backbone, anything you want. You would have one GSP in that case which bootstraps your javascript code, and the rest would be handled by the client application.
Grails is a web framework and is not just a backend framework. It supports both JSP and GSP ( Groovy Server Pages) for views.
If you plan to use Ajax functionality, you can make use of one of many javascript frameworks available. You can also go ahead with Flex (since you already know it) or use a javascript framework like ExtJs, Dojo, YUI etc...
I know that an MVC framework allows you to separate business logic, data base access and presentation, but why do we need a framework to do this.
Can't we just keep our classes separated, perhaps using different packages/folders for the model, view and controller classes?
In my opinion the thing you are talking about is the MVC pattern and not a specific framework. Of course you can go and keep all your classes within one project and still use the MVC pattern, as you have all your UI code in the views, the logic in the controllers, ...
A MVC framework on the other hand makes it easier for you to use this pattern. It may provide some base classes for controllers and a mechanism for the communication between view and controller.
I don't know if you are familiar with ASP.NET MVC. The framework itself is very small, but it helps you developing an application with the MVC pattern, as you don't have do think about the previously decribed areas...
Hope this helps
An MVC framework is a framework written to split up the the business logic, database access and presentation.
This is very useful in most web applications, and now lately into software/desktop applications.
This is due to the fact that following the MVC model, your code will be much clearer, cleaner and you keep your application DRY (Do not Repeat Yourself).
You can write your own classes and separate them into Model, View and Control. But again, you will need a framework to help you in accomplishing certain tasks. Like a List control in ASP.NET, or PHP framework being able to help you translate text between languages and so on. (Oh why reinvent the wheel?!)
MVC and framework is a different thing. MVC is just an architectural pattern, which can be applied with any project, with or without framework.
So you don't need a framework to do this. You can separate them by yourself. :)
MVC stands for “MODEL” “VIEW” “CONTROLLER”. ASP.NET MVC is an architecture to develop ASP.NET web applications in a different manner than the traditional ASP.NET web development. Web applications developed with ASP.NET MVC are even more SEO (Search Engine) friendly.
Developing ASP.NET MVC application requires Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5 or higher.
Model:
MVC model is basically a C# or VB.NET class.
A model is accessible by both controller and view.
A model can be used to
pass data from Controller to view.
A view can use model to display
data in page.
View:
View is an ASPX page without having a code behind file.
All page specific HTML generation and formatting can be done inside view.
One can use Inline code (server tags ) to develop dynamic pages.
A request to view (ASPX page) can be made only from a controller’s action method
Controller:
Controller is basically a C# or VB.NET class which inherits system.mvc.controller.
Controller is a heart of the entire MVC architecture.
Inside Controller’s class action methods can be implemented which are responsible for responding to browser OR calling views.
Controller can access and use model class to pass data to views
Controller uses ViewData to pass any data to view.
MVC is a code organization architecture style to organize your code-logic in a meaningful way for web applications. As a programmer I have almost puked when I have inherited other people's code when their code logic is all over the place and following their web application code turns into following a rabbit down the gutter hole. Why MVC? hmm.. well why should I use a filing cabinet or folders to organize my plethora of paper and not just have my papers stashed in a large pile and have others figure how they connect to each other. It increases code readability. With MVC it becomes very easy to follow code logic since you are following standard structure for a web application. Business logic is separated out from UI. Easier to delegate work decouple work on a project.
You can of course approach it yourself by segregating your classes. A framework supplies common scaffolding that you wouldn't have to build yourself. But it will also impose some structure on your code. You'll have to evaluate whether the framework helps more than it hurts.
You are correct, there are strategies that you can implement to help with separation of concerns without using MVC.
Microsoft's ASP.NET MVC framework is one strategy that can be employed, and that is what I think you are asking about.
This MVC framework makes such separation of concerns easy.
The other major advantage of MVC is testability - (depends on whether you believe in unit testing - I do).
The MVC framework ensures that all orchestration logic is on your controllers and through the FormControls collection allows full unit testing of all aspects of your application except for how it is presented.
As the MS MVC framework encourages adherence to common rules and structure of the application which should lead to greater maintainability.
The major downside of MVC is the code-in-front code weaving required for presentation, but this can be easily overcome.
Perhaps this is just a linguistic thing. I've seen "frameworks" referring to themselves as a DSL -- Domain Specific Language.
And you don't need a framework But here's something to consider: You already know for a web app you're going to want to do a few common things... route URLs, render pages, etc. Why re-write it all? For other problem domains you'll have generic things to do as well.
Hai Friends There are somemany types of architecture frame work has been there,firstly i know 2tier and 3 tier frame work ,the 3 tier and mvc ,entity framework are same but in different name's,so study a good background in any one architecture there fore if you went to any multinational companies ,you can easly score/highlight to your carrer.
Model View Controller or MVC as it is popularly called, is a software design
pattern for developing web applications. A Model View Controller pattern is made
up of the following three parts:
**Model** - The lowest level of the pattern which is responsible for maintaining data.
**View** - This is responsible for displaying all or a portion of the data to the user.
**Controller** - Software Code that controls the interactions between the Model and View