extJS4 difference between Ext.Ajax and Ext.data.proxy.Ajax - ajax

I am new to the extJS framework and after looking at these two classes I am curious when it is better to use one or the other. Is one better for submitting and one for getting? In my current situation I am using a grid and the api says to use the proxy.Ajax which I trust. But lets say I want to send the JSON back to a database, would I be better off using Ext.Ajax?
Also I am rather new to JSON I understand that its just a string with regular expressions essentially. What is the best way to send the json straight to a database if I don’t want to store the json locally?

Ext.Ajax is used to make one-off requests to a server. You can use this for GET and POST requests.
Ext.data.proxy.Ajax is used by the data package, in particular, Ext.data.Store's. You cannot use this 'manually'. You must use it via the data package.

Related

Is it necessary to use the form to transfer data to the server?

I'm new to backend programming. I chose the laravel framework. Already learned the basics. During the study, the question arose: is it necessary to use the form to transfer data to the server ?. For example: the deletion route looks like this to me
Delete.
If I leave it, will it be a mistake? Maybe advise an article or something. Thanks in advance
Short answer is no, it's not necessary, but you should (if you're bound to HTML only).
The HTTP standard has different methods for different purposes. Using an anchor tag will always make a HTTP GET request to the link/server, which is not ideal, GET request should never change the remote (server) state, that's a job other methods (POST, PUT, DELETE, PATCH), you should try to use the method that better describe what you're trying to do: in your case I suppose you're trying to delete a complaint, so a DELETE or POST is what you're looking for.
The only way to use make a non GET request in plain HTML* is to use <form>. Also if you're planning to use a method different from POST you should take a look at Laravel's #method here
Mind that if you can and want to use JavaScript to perform your request you totally can, dropping the requirement to have use form (docs and docs).

Standart/common/right way to send data in API request

I'm trying to learn how to create an API (I use Laravel in the backend and Postman to send requests), but I have a basic doubt when sending data to be processed in the backend.
I see that there are several ways to send data to the backend, but I'm not sure which is the right way to do it.
For example, with Postman I have seen that the sending can be done as parameters through the URI:
www.example.com/api/v1/orders?limit=10&offset=20
I can also do it in the body of the request through the tags
form data
x-www-form-urlencoded
raw
other ...
I understand that I can make the request along with sending data in several ways. I would like to know what should be the correct, standard or optimal way to do it for usual requests such as getting a series of records with a filtering, an order or a pagination.
I would also like to know if the way of sending data should depend on the verb to be used in the request.
My main question/problem is that I would like the way users use the API to be as simple or suitable as possible for them. I'm clear that I want to always return the data (when necessary) in JSON format but I'm not clear on how it should be sent.
Please, could someone clarify these doubts (maybe a link to a page where this kind of doubts are dealt with).
Thank you very much in advance.
It depends:
GET, HEAD and DELETE don't have a request body so all parameters have to be send via URL
POST can be easily sent via form data in Laravel
For PUT/PATCH I prefer application/json because PHP sends it via php://input stream which can have some problems in Laravel sometimes
You can also combine URL parameters and the request body. Compound types (for example models) can only be send as one via request body while it might suffice to send an id via URL parameter.
I guess, nearly more important is the overall format and documentation. The format should be consistent, easy to understand and maybe standardized (for example: https://jsonapi.org/format/#crud).
Keep in mind that forms do two things by default:
Only having methods GET and POST
Only having ectypes application/x-www-form-urlencoded, multipart/form-data and text/plain
If you want to enforce something else, you have to use scripts/libraries to do this.
Nowadays, it appears that JSON content (for POST, PUT, and PATCH) is the most popular and readable. It is well recognizable and clean. Examples in the documentation are easy to read.
I would go for JSON for both, incoming parameters and the outgoing response. This regards parameters related to the business logic of your application.
At the same time, for GET, HEAD, and DELETE methods, you don't have a payload at all. For parameters related to controlling the API (i.e. not strictly related to the business logic of the application, but to the API itself) I'd go for query parameters. This applies to parameters like limit, offset, order_by, etc.
P.S. There is only one caveat related to the JSON format. If your API happens to have file parameters you may face the problem. You can still use JSON format, but in such a case, you should encode your files (e.g. using base64) and put it as string parameters of your JSON. This may be demanding for the consumers of your API ;) This will also enlarge your files and will probably force you to process these files in memory. The alternative is to use multipart/form-data as a request Content-Type - this way you can have both, the form and separate "space" for files. It's worth keeping this case in mind when you decide.

How can I use isValidJSValue to validate a query variable in my client code?

I'm writing client-side code for an app that will query a GraphQL server. In a couple of places in my code, I'm passing around data that will eventually get turned into a query variable, so it needs to validate against a specific GraphQLInputType in my schema. On looking into some of the utilities that graphql-js provides, it looks like the isValidJSValue checker is exactly what I'm looking for, and its comments even mention that it's intended to be used to do just that.
The issue is that I don't have access to the GraphQL type I want to validate against as a JS object, which is what I'm pretty sure that function is looking for. I'm importing my schema (as an npm depdendency) as JSON, or I also have it in the schema notation. Is there some other utility I can use to get the JS type I need from one of those sources, and then use that to check my data with isValidJSValue? Or is there some other way I could go about this that I just haven't thought of?
You can use the JSON schema you have imported to construct an actual GraphQL schema instance using buildClientSchema here: https://github.com/graphql/graphql-js/blob/master/src/utilities/buildClientSchema.js
Then, it should be a simple matter of looking in the types field of the resulting schema to find your input type, and then calling isValidJSValue on it.
I'm curious, though - why validate the value on the client before sending it, rather than just relying on the validation the server will do?

MiniProfilerEF view results without RenderIncludes()

Is there another way to view the profiling results of MiniProfiler (I'm specifically interested in EF5 version)?
Every tutorial that I've seen uses MiniProfiler.RenderIncludes(); but since my MVC app mostly returns JSON, that is not an option for me.
Is there a way to write results to file or something like that?
You can read and write results to just about anywhere by changing the MiniProfiler.Settings.Storage to a different IStorage implementation from the default (which stores to http cache). If you wanted to, this could store to and read from a file pretty easily (you would have to write your own custom implementation for that).
The files served by RenderIncludes are the html templates for displaying the results and the script to retrieve the results from the server and render them on the client (all found here). But you are by no means obliged to use this mechanism. If you want to write your own logic for retrieving and displaying results, you should base this off of the logic found in MiniProfilerHandler.GetSingleProfilerResult. This function roughly performs the following (putting in the siginificant steps for your purposes):
Gets Id of next results to retrieve (through MiniProfiler.Settings.Storage.List())
Retrieves the actual results (MiniProfiler.Settings.Storage.Load(id))
Marks the results as viewed so that they wont be retrieved again (MiniProfiler.Settings.Storage.SetViewed(user, id))
Converts these to ResultsJson and returns it
With access to MiniProfiler.Settings.Storage, you should be able to retrieve, serve and consume the profile results in any way that you want. And if you are interested in using the RenderIncludes engine but want to mess around with the html/js being served, you can provide your own custom ui templates that will replace the default behavior.

Django client side query construction

I'm making a pretty standard AJAXy (well, no XML actually) web page. The browser makes a bunch of API queries that return JSON to run the site. The problem is, I need to add to the API interface each time the page needs to do something new. The new API interface is usually little more than a database query followed by mapping the returned objects to JSON.
What I'd like to do is to get rid of all that server-side duplication and just have the page make database requests itself (using the model interface), but in a way that is safe (i.e. just read only ones). I think this would amount to an interface for constructing Q objects using JSON or something like that, and then send that up to the server, run the query, and return the results. Before I go making my own half-broken architecture for this, I'm wondering if this has already been done well. Also, is this even the best way to go about eliminating this duplication?
Thanks
Search multiple fields of django model without 3rd party app
Django SQL OR via filter() & Q(): Dynamic?
Generate a django queryset based on dict keys
Just replace with operator.and_ where appropriate.

Resources