AboutCode.net

Thoughts on Software by Andrew Davey

Sunday, July 13, 2008

Strongly Typed View Data in NRest

Sending data from a resource to a view in a strongly-typed, but syntactically lightweight manner is not possible with C# or VB.NET.

So check out this screencast of the new "render" macro in NRest!

In a nutshell, my resource looks like:

[Resource("")]
public class RootResource
{
    public Get() : void
    {
        def test = 42;
        render (Foo = "Hello", Bar = "World", test);
    }
}

My VB.NET view looks like:

Public Class RootPage
Inherits Page(Of RootPageContent)

    Public Overrides Function GetHtml() As XElement
        Return _
        <html>
            <body><%= Content.Foo %>, <%= Content.Bar %></body>
        </html>
    End Function
End Class

Saturday, May 10, 2008

Hasic Demo

A demo website using my Hasic view engine for ASP.NET MVC.

HasicDemo.zip (275.95 KB)

Saturday, May 10, 2008 4:37:41 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)

Comments [0] .net | vb.net | web | hasic

Monday, March 24, 2008

Testing Controller RenderView

I've seen people testing that RenderView is called by a controller by inheriting into a "testable" controller. Madness!

RenderView is just a convenience method that calls to IViewEngine, so why not just test expectations on that with a mock? We basically want to test that the correct ViewContext is sent to the RenderView method of the view engine.

This is my test:

[TestFixture]
public class HomeControllerTests : ControllerTestsBase<HomeController>
{
    public override HomeController CreateController()
    {
        return new HomeController();
    }

    [Test]
    public void Renders_Index()
    {
        var render = ExpectRenderView();

Controller.Index();

Assert.That(render.Data.ViewName, Is.EqualTo("Index"));
}
}

I don't think we can get more straight forward than that!

This is my test base class:
(I'm using Moq as the mock framework.)

public abstract class ControllerTestsBase<T>
    where T : Controller
{
    public T Controller;
    public Mock<IViewEngine> ViewEngine;

    [SetUp]
    public virtual void SetUp()
    {
        Controller = CreateController();
        ViewEngine = new Mock<IViewEngine>();
        Controller.ViewEngine = ViewEngine.Object;

Controller.ControllerContext = new Mock<ControllerContext>(new Mock<HttpContextBase>().Object, new RouteData(), Controller).Object;
}

public abstract T CreateController();

    public RenderCall<ViewContext> ExpectRenderView()
    {
        var render = new RenderCall<ViewContext>();
        ViewEngine.Expect(v => v.RenderView(It.IsAny<ViewContext>()))
            .Callback(new Action<ViewContext>(render.Set));
        return render;
    }
}

The RenderCall class provides a place to receive the view context that is passed.

public class RenderCall<T>
{
bool _called;
T _data;

    public T Data
    {
        get
        {
            if (!_called) throw new InvalidOperationException("View was not rendered.");
            return _data;
        }
    }

    public void Set(T data)
    {
        _data = data;
        _called = true;
    }
}
Monday, March 24, 2008 4:08:16 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)      Comments [0]  .net | mvc | thinking | web

Tuesday, February 19, 2008

VB.NET 9 as an HTML View Engine

VB.NET 9 introduces a clean syntax for expressing XML data. XHTML is XML so why not use VB.NET to generate it, instead of ASPX pages? People are creating view engines for the new ASP.NET MVC framework. How about a view engine that uses VB.NET XML literals?

The benefits to this approach include full intellisense and access to a the full VB.NET language when creating HTML.

I see a view as a function from some data to an XML element (the <html> element):

Function CustomersPage(ByVal title As String, ByVal customers As IEnumerable(Of Customer)) As XElement
    Return _
        <html>
            <head>
                <title><%= title %></title>
            </head>
            <body>
            <%= From customer In customers Select _
                <div id=<%= customer.LastName %>>
                    <h1><%= customer.FirstName %></h1>
                </div> %>
            </body>
        </html>
End Function

The important change from ASPX is that this is HTML in Code, rather than Code in HTML. As a result less "automagical" behaviour is required; It's just a function! This means AJAX features like "partial rendering", where a section of page needs to be updated, can be expressed by just calling a function that returns a <div> element. That same function can be used by the full HTML page function too.

ASPX "usercontrols" become simply functions as well. ASPX Master Pages are functions that have arguments for "placeholders" that get inserted into an template HTML page. Instead of having to reinvent a bunch of programming language concepts inside ASPX, we can just use a programming language that now support XML!

The only down side to this approach is we lose the IDE visual designer support. However, I find viewing an ASPX page that contains even simple conditional data rendering next to useless. I'd rather keep IE open and just refresh the page to see changes.

I am yet to embrace the MVC framework. I am waiting to see if the next release can better support Snooze framework ideas. However, there's no reason I can't use this VB XML magic in Snooze as it current is.

Tuesday, February 19, 2008 12:12:17 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)

Thursday, January 10, 2008

Snooze - A REST Framework for .NET

I have released an initial version of Snooze. http://www.assembla.com/wiki/show/snooze

Snooze is an REST framework for ASP.NET. It puts the emphasis back on the "R" of URI. The Resource concept is a first-class citizen.

In Snooze you create a resource class that defines the URI template and HTTP methods it supports.

[HttpResource("customer/{CustomerId}")] // Defines the URI template for this resource
public class CustomerResource : HttpResource // A useful base class that implements IHttpResource
{
    // URI template variables are mapped to properties
    public int CustomerId { get; set; }

    // Handles the HTTP GET method
    public override void Get()
    {
        RenderView("Customer", Data.Customers[CustomerId]);
    }

    public override void Put()
    {
        // Read data sent in Request body and update the customer...
    }

    public override void Delete()
    {
        // Delete the customer...
    }

    // HTTP POST can also be provided if it makes sense for the resource.
}

This will mean a URI like "http://yourserver.com/customer/42" will invoke the Get method of an instance where CustomerId equals 42.

What about creating a new Customer?

Well you don't have an ID for the new customer since that is probably created in the database. Therefore you don't know what the URI will be yet. The correct solution here is to POST the new customer data to a CustomerList resource, with URI "/customers".

Alternative GET Views

You can create extra GET methods:

[HttpGetView("edit")]
public void GetEdit()
{
RenderView("CustomerEdit", Data.Customers[CustomerId]);
}

This results in URIs like "/customer/42?edit"

File Extensions

To support different file formats, such as XML and JSON use:

[HttpGetFile(".xml")]
public void GetEdit()
{
SendXml(Data.Customers[CustomerId]);
}

This will be mapped to by URIs like /customer/42.xml

Sub-Resources

Resources can be naturally nested. For example, a Customer may have Orders.

[HttpSubResource(typeof(CustomerResource), "order/{OrderId}", true)]
public class OrderResource : HttpSubResource<CustomerResource>
{
public int OrderId { get; set; }
// ...
}

In this sub-resource, you can have access the parent CustomerResource, using the strongly-typed, ParentResource property.

URIs for this sub-resource will look like: "/customer/42/order/123"

The "true" argument in the attribute, specifies that parent query string parameters are added to this sub-resource URI as well. So a parent with URI template "customer/{CustomerId}?foo={Foo}" will yield sub-resource URI template "/customer/{CustomerId}/order/{OrderId}?foo={Foo}".

Nullable Resource Properties

Imagine a blog posts resource. Its URI could be /posts/{Year}/{Month}/{Day} to get all the posts on a given date. Now what if you want to naturally get the posts for a whole month, year, or ever?

By declaring the properties as nullable, e.g. "int?" in C#, Snooze will also map the "reduced" URIs to your class. You can then test the properties for "null" and return data accordingly.

Reusing Resource URIs

When rendering an HTML view it is likely you will need to link to other resources. Instead of manually typing the URI string, you can call the Uri property available on HttpResource.

new CustomerResource { CustomerId = 42 } .Uri

Resource Areas

Snooze supports resource "areas". These let you map all the resources of a given assembly into a given sub-path. If, for example, a third-party blogging package was built using Snooze you could include it as follows:

web.config:

So the blog resource URIs would look something like: http://mysite.com/blog/posts/2007/01

HTML Form Support

HTML forms only support GET and POST. To overcome this limitation you can include: <input type="hidden" name="__method" value="DELETE" /> to override the name of the HTTP method used by Snooze.

Feedback

This project came mostly out of curiosity! I wanted to see if REST could be done better under ASP.NET. The code is still very new (less than two days!) It is open source (BSD license) and available via SubVersion. A quick sample project is also provided.

Let me know what you think. Everything is open to changes. Join the assembla project if you would like to contribute your help.

Thursday, January 10, 2008 9:42:04 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)

Comments [1] .net | c# | programming | REST | web

Monday, December 24, 2007

Nouns-Verbs, OOP-Functional, REST-Web Services

This is just a quick thought that came to me whilst making coffee this morning...

REST places focus on nouns (resources) in a system. Whereas it seems web services are more concerned with verbs. A service is a collection of operations. The data is passed to and from operations as messages.

Now both approaches have their merits. What strikes me as strange is our choice of programming languages when attempting to implement the aforementioned architectural styles. Object orientated programming is all about nouns (classes). Functional programming is all about verbs (functions).

I know that there is way more to web services than just a bunch of operations (because that would be simply RPC right?). However, my point is that surely OOP is ideally suited to describing a set of resources as required by a RESTful design.

Monday, December 24, 2007 9:44:48 AM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)

Comments [2] programming | REST | thinking | web

Sunday, December 23, 2007

REST Verbs in ASP.NET MVC

I am yet to play with the new ASP.NET MVC framework. However, I am spending time reading around the area to see if it will benefit me to get more involved.

A concern that came to mind when researching is the claims of it enabling a RESTful approach to web programming. Whilst this may be true, all the examples so far seem contrary to REST. My limited understanding of REST says that URLs represent a Resource. How is http://www.mysite.com/customers/delete/42 a resource?!

Yet that is indeed the format of URL we are being shown by Scott Guthrie and others. It makes ASP.NET MVC look more like another RPC system, just with parameters encoded into the address instead of message body.

So is it possible to specify a resource URL and then a number of HTTP verbs that can execute against it? It probably is, given the extensibility of ASP.NET MVC's architecture. However, one may ask, should I be hacking this into the framework? Would the end result look anything like the original MVC code at all? Probably not!

Is it time for a real REST framework built on top of ASP.NET? I think it is!

It needs to be Resource centered. It needs to fully leverage the rich feature set of HTTP, not just GET and POST! And just to be awesome, it needs to have a client-side story too. Real REST relies on the client-side to store state. Could this be Silverlight, or do we still want JavaScript? (I'm up for cross compiling to JS from C# or MSIL!)

Sunday, December 23, 2007 4:02:00 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)

Friday, November 02, 2007

Separating design and code with HTML and JavaScript

There is a lot of hype around Silverlight and WPF enabling true separation of developer and designer. This is certainly a great way to work. However, I don't think this is enabled only now by XAML. There is no reason the same cannot be achieved with HTML.

It seems like developers went so far down the server-side HTML generation route we left designers floundering with only CSS left in their toolkit. Whilst you can do some amazing things with CSS, sometimes you just need to change the HTML. If the HTML is riddled with <% %>, server controls or other template commands how is out poor designer going to work with the file?

My current attention is around using pure HTML and putting all dynamic content generation into JavaScript. The only thing to enforce on the HTML is that certain elements have known "id" attribute values.

Friday, November 02, 2007 4:42:04 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)

Comments [3] html | programming | ria | thinking | web

Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Mobile Model Screencast

My latest screencast is online: Mobile Model in MVP web app

This screencast continues from the work I demonstrated in a previous screencast: http://channel9.msdn.com/Showpost.aspx?postid=344711
When implemented a Model-View-Presenter pattern client-side in JavaScript there is a need to get data from the server. Rather than make this divide explicit with HTTP request, etc, I have used the idea of a model object that moves between the client and server.
So the programmer simply writes the client and server pieces of functionality and lets my framework do the plumbing.
I use code generation and Script# to make writing a client-side web app much more seemless than the usual javascript/XML/JSON/web service madness.
I'm developing the ideas shown here in a project at the moment. If there is sufficient interest I may extract a framework to give to the community.
How do people feel about this approach to web development? What kinds of additions/modifications should be made?
p.s. I have a bit of a cold at the moment, so sorry for the croaky voice in the recording!

Wednesday, October 17, 2007 8:32:19 PM (GMT Standard Time, UTC+00:00)

Comments [11] .net | c# | mvp | programming | ria | screencast | tier_split | web