I have an ASP.NET MVC app. I have seen similar question asked. However, I haven't found a good answer. Essentially, I want to use the following routes:
/admin/users
/admin/users/create
/admin/users/[someId]
/admin/roles
/admin/roles/create
/admin/roles/[someId]
I have the following file structure:
/Controllers
AdminController.cs
/Admin
UsersController.cs
RolesController.cs
/Views
/Admin
Index.cshtml
/Users
Index.cshtml
Detail.cshtml
Create.cshtml
/Roles
Index.cshtml
Create.cshtml
Detail.cshtml
When I run my app, I just get The resource cannot be found.
What am I doing wrong? I set breakpoints, but none of them are being hit. It's like the routes aren't mapping to the controllers. I'm not sure what I need to do though.
You do not need to create sub folders for this to work. Just have 2 controllers(UsersController and RolesController) and you can use attribute routing to define the custom routing pattern you want.
Assuming you have attribute routing enabled
public class UsersController : Controller
{
[Route("admin/users")]
public ActionResult Index() { // to do : Return something }
[Route("admin/users/create")]
public ActionResult Create() { // to do : Return something }
[Route("admin/users/{id}")]
public ActionResult View(int id) { // to do : Return something }
}
Or you can do the RoutePrefix on the controller level.
[RoutePrefix("admin/users")]
public class UsersController : Controller
{
[Route("")]
public ActionResult Index() { // to do : Return something }
[Route("create")]
public ActionResult Create() { // to do : Return something }
[Route("{id}")]
public ActionResult View(int id) { // to do : Return something }
}
You can do the samething for the RolesControllers as well.
You can enable attribute routing in the RegisterRoutes method in RouteConfig.cs file.
public static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes)
{
routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}");
routes.MapMvcAttributeRoutes(); //This line enables attribute routing
//Existing default Route definition goes here
}
You may also consider creating an "Admin" area and put your controllers inside that. Areas are the right solution if you want to logically group similar functionality.
If you do not prefer attribute routing ( why not ?) , you an define these custom route patterns in your RouteConfig. The order in you define the route matters.So make sure you define your specific routes before the default generic one.
You can also override your route tables by decorating your action methods with the RouteAttribute class.
For example:
class AdminController
{
[Route("/admin/users/create")]
public ViewResult CreateUser()
{
...
}
}
This has the advantage of separating the method name from the url component.
You can also route multiple URLs to a single method:
class AdminController
{
[Route("/admin/users/{someId:guid}")]
[Route("/admin/users/{someId:guid}/details")]
public ViewResult UserDetails(Guid someID)
{
...
}
}
As mason said, the file structure isn't important in MVC routing.
If you want to use convention (folder) based routing, you could use MvcCodeRouting to do exactly what you have specified here. It uses namespaces by default, so when you add controllers in a hierarchy, it will generate routes in the same hierarchy automatically. No need to apply the [Route] attribute everywhere and setup your routes manually.
Related
I need to generate a navigation that has 'System' and 'Category' archons or buttons. System and Category are using the same controller. I would like to use [Route()] instead of the Startup file for routing.
For category archon works great:
<a asp-area="Admin" asp-controller="#value.Controller" asp-action="#Constants.Route.List" asp-route-valueId="#value.ValueId">#value.Value</a>
but I dont kow how to use the same controller for 'admin/system/list' instead of admin/categorytype/list, so far I tried:
1)
<a asp-area="Admin" asp-route="System" asp-action="#Constants.Route.List" asp-route-valueId="#value.ValueId">#value.Value</a>
2)
<a asp-route="Admin/System/List" asp-route-valueId="#value.ValueId">#value.Value</a>
and at controller
[Area("Admin")]
[Route("Admin/[controller]")]
[Route("Admin/System")]
[Authorize]
public class CategoryTypeController : Controller {}
[Route("[action]")]
public ViewResult List(int valueId) {}
3)
#value.Value
and at controller
[Area("Admin")]
[Route("Admin/[controller]")]
[Route("Admin/System", Name = "SystemValue")]
[Authorize]
public class CategoryTypeController : Controller {}
[Route("[action]")]
public ViewResult List(int valueId) {}
none of the above routes generated url that allow me to go to the CategoryType controller and List action by /admin/system/list
I also have app.UseMvcWithDefaultRoute(); at Startup file.
Edit:
When I enter the address manually /admin/system/list - the router works,
but I can't generate such a url for button or archon to match /admin/system/list
as in the attached picture, the archon does not have any url
EDIT:
I found a solution, but I'm not happy with it, it turns out that I do not understand how routing works. For me, the [Route ()] attribute is one way to define routs and app.UseMvc() is the second way. I had to define routes in two places.
at Startup.cs
app.UseMvc(routes =>
{
routes.MapRoute(
name: "SystemValue",
template: "Admin/System/List/{id?}",
defaults: new { area = "Admin", controller = "CategoryType", action = "List" });
});
controller
[Area("Admin")]
[Route("Admin/[controller]")]
[Route("Admin/System", Name = "SystemValue")]
[Authorize]
public class CategoryTypeController : Controller
{}
[Route("[action]")]
public ViewResult List(int valueId) {}
view
#value.Value
I will still be looking for a solution how to do it using only [Route ("")]
If you want to specify the routes individualy, you can use named routes, but it is needed to be specified on the method and not on the controller.
[Route("/admin/system/list/{id}",name ="SystemList")]
[Route("/admin/category/list/{id}",name ="CategoryList")]
public IActionResult List(int id)
{
...
}
you can generate the url for this route as
<a asp-route="CategoryList" asp-route-id="#value.ValueId">#value.Value</a>
The route system can use the routes declared at the startup or use routes declared by attributes, but they are not mixed, when you sepecify a route attribute at controller level the routes from the startup are ignored.
I am working on an asp.net 5 mvc api, and I am currently working on the Accounts Controller.
since I saw in many different places that there is a convention of using /api/Tokenrouting to a login in a web api. I would like to route to that specific method without the accounts prefix, I would prefer not using a different controller, and I would prefer using Attributes over routing in Startup.cs to avoid confusion in the future.
this is what I have currently
[Route("api/[controller]")]
public class AccountsController : Controller
{
[HttpPost("login")]
public async Task<JwtToken> Token([FromBody]Credentials credentials)
{
...
}
[HttpPost]
public async Task CreateUser([FromBody] userDto)
{
...
}
}
With attribute routing you can use a tilde (~) on the Action's route attribute to override the default route of the Controller if needed:
[Route("api/[controller]")]
public class AccountsController : Controller {
[HttpPost]
[Route("~/api/token")] //routes to `/api/token`
public async Task<JwtToken> Token([FromBody]Credentials credentials) {
...
}
[HttpPost]
[Route("users")] // routes to `/api/accounts/users`
public async Task CreateUser([FromBody] userDto) {
...
}
}
For ASP.NET Core it seems that the tilde ~ symbol (see accepted answer) is not needed anymore to override the controller's route prefix – instead, the following rule applies:
Route templates applied to an action that begin with a / don't get combined with route templates applied to the controller. This example matches a set of URL paths similar to the default route.
Here is an example:
[Route("foo")]
public class FooController : Controller
{
[Route("bar")] // combined with "foo" to map to route "/foo/bar"
public IActionResult Bar()
{
// ...
}
[Route("/hello/world")] // not combined; maps to route "/hello/world"
public IActionResult HelloWorld()
{
}
}
from https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/aspnet/core/mvc/controllers/routing
[Route("[controller]/[action]")]
public class HomeController : Controller
{
[Route("~/")]
[Route("/Home")]
[Route("~/Home/Index")]
public IActionResult Index()
{
return ControllerContext.MyDisplayRouteInfo();
}
public IActionResult About()
{
return ControllerContext.MyDisplayRouteInfo();
}
}
In the preceding code, the Index method templates must prepend / or ~/ to the route templates. Route templates applied to an action that begin with / or ~/ don't get combined with route templates applied to the controller.
I just have one quick question about what seems to have been a limitation with ASP.NET Web API Attribute Routing, but hoping I just suck at research. In my controller, I'm trying to do something like this:
public class OrdersController : ApiController
{
[HttpGet]
[Route("{apiRoot}/customers/{id:int}/orders")]
public IHttpActionResult GetCustomerOrders(int id) {...}
}
Where {apiRoot} is defined in either a configuration file.
This may not actually be necessary, but I'd like to know how to put a specific path in the route attribute without having to code a static path. Is the general idea here supposed to be that you only put text into the route path, except for your parameters which go in {}?
How about switching to using a RoutePrefix:
[MyRoutePrefix]
public class OrdersController : ApiController
{
[HttpGet]
[Route("customers/{id:int}/orders")]
public IHttpActionResult GetCustomerOrders(int id) {...}
}
public class MyRoutePrefixAttribute : RoutePrefixAttribute
{
public MyRoutePrefixAttribute()
{
Prefix = "the route prefix";
}
}
RoutePrefixAttribute isn't sealed like RouteAttribute so extending it should allow you do what you need. Assuming, of course, that all of the controllers in a single class using the same root path.
Note: I haven't had a chance to try this but given what I know of attribute routing, I don't see why it shouldn't work.
I have two controllers for my User model. One is a regular MVC controller which handles the views and inherits from Controller. Then I have an API controller which inherits from ApiController. Their names are UsersController and UsersApiController respectively. I wish to remove from "Api" from the API controller's URL so I can type:
www.mywebsite.com/api/Users
rather than:
www.mywebsite.com/api/UsersApi
which contains a redundant "api".
I have tried applying the attribute [Route("Users")] and [Route("api/Users")] to the entire controller but neither work and they seem to just break it. My WebApiConfig.cs has the default route config.
How can I do this?
You should be able to use Attribute routing.
[RoutePrefix("api/users")]
public class UsersApiController : ApiController
{
[Route("")]
public HttpResponseMessage Get()
{
}
}
You should be able to customize it per action methods as well
public class UsersApiController : ApiController
{
[Route("api/users")]
public HttpResponseMessage Get()
{
}
}
I'm trying to setup an Area Route in my ASP.NET MVC application.
I'm also using the nuget package AttributeRouting, not the normal MVC register area routes thingy.
From my understanding, area routes look like this : /area/controller/method
What I'm trying to do is :- /api/search/index
which means:
Area => Api
Controller => SearchController
ActionMethod => Index
.
[RouteArea("Api")]
public class SearchController : Controller
{
[POST("Index")]
public JsonResult Index(IndexInputModel indexInputModel) { .. }
}
But that doesn't create that route. This is what it creates: /api/index
The search controller is missing.
I've had a look the docs and noticed the RoutePrefix so I tried this..
[RouteArea("Api")]
[RoutePrefix("Search")]
public class SearchController : Controller
{
[POST("Index")]
public JsonResult Index(IndexInputModel indexInputModel) { .. }
}
and that actually creates the route /api/search/index.
But why do i need to put the RoutePrefix in there? Shouldn't it be smart enough to already figure out that this is a SearchController and create the 3-segment route?
You don't need to put a RoutePrefix anywhere. It's just there as a refactoring/DRY aid. Consider:
[RouteArea("Api")]
public class SearchController : Controller
{
[POST("Search/Index")]
public ActionResult Index() { }
}
If you had a number of actions, maybe you want them all with the "Search" prefix, so you'd do:
[RouteArea("Api")]
[RoutePrefix("Search")]
public class SearchController : Controller
{
[POST("Index")]
public ActionResult Index() { }
// Other actions to prefix....
}
Shouldn't it be smart enough?
Not to be cheeky, but no. AR was never intended to read all your code for you and magically generate routes. It was intended to keep your URLs top of mind, and to do that you should see your URLs. Not that this is the best or only way of doing things, just that was my intent from the get.
The real reason why it isn't smart enough is that the concept of "Area" has nothing to do with URL. An area is a logical unit. You could expose that logical unit without any route prefix (so it would be hanging off ~/) or you could expose it off "This/Is/A/Prefix".
However, if you want it to be smart enough.... I just released v3.4, which will let you do this (if you want to; don't have to):
namespace Krome.Web.Areas.Api
{
[RouteArea]
[RoutePrefix]
public class SearchController : Controller
{
[POST]
public ActionResult Index() { }
}
}
This will yield the following route: ~/Api/Search/Index. The area comes from the last section of the controller's namespace; the route prefix comes from the controller name; and the rest of the url comes from the action name.
One more thing
If you want to get out a route area url and route prefix rat's nest for individual actions in a controller, do this:
[RouteArea("Api")]
[RoutePrefix("Search")]
public class SearchController : Controller
{
[POST("Index")]
public ActionResult Index() { }
[GET("Something")] // yields ~/Api/Search/Something
[GET("NoPrefix", IgnoreRoutePrefix = true)] // yields ~/Api/NoPrefix
[GET("NoAreaUrl", IgnoreAreaUrl = true)] // yields ~/Search/NoAreaUrl
[GET("Absolutely-Pure", IsAbsoluteUrl = true)] // yields ~/Absolutely-Pure
public ActionResult Something() {}
}