I m trying to use subfolders within the Controllers folder:
The structure looks like this:
Controllers (Folder)
LoginController.cs
WelcomeController.cs
Settings (Folder)
UsersController.cs
I've several problems.
When I perform a return RedirectToAction("Index", "welcome") from my LoginController, the url looks like http://mywebsite.local/settings/welcome
I thought I will get a 404 error..
How to make the redirection launches http://mywebsite.local/welcome and get a 404 error when I launch http://mywebsite.local/settings/welcome
Do I really need to use Areas?
This is my RouteConfig.cs
routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}");
routes.MapRoute(
name: "settings",
url: "settings/{controller}/{action}/{id}",
defaults: new { controller = "Users", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional }
);
routes.MapRoute(
name: "Default",
url: "{controller}/{action}/{id}",
defaults: new { controller = "Login", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional }
);
Do I really need to use Areas?
No, but you're trying to re-invent the wheel - creating a structure a bit like Areas. I'd recommend you go with Areas, it will make your life easier.
Area Hype:
I wouldn't recommend applying Areas just because you can.
That would be like "giving a man a hammer and suddenly everything's a nail".
In this case we have a cool feature called "Areas" and (without knowing the underlying architecture)
others recommended it the instant someone asks about sub-folders.
Areas weren't designed for the sole purpose of giving you an extra Route Parameter.
The "Areas" original intent is to give you a clear SoC (Separation of Concerns).
For Example:
Say you have two separate web application experiences and have decided to roll them under one Solution.
Your call-center may need to look up detailed information and enter in data on individual customers, while your managers and executives will peruse higher-level reporting and rarely enter in data.
In this scenario it may make sense to split your business logic into "Reporting" and "CallCenter" Areas.
Sub-Directories:
In MVC, the Sub-Folders you use under "Controllers" are Ignored when it comes to Routing.
SubFolders are perfectly fine with how the Questioner is using them to organize his Controllers.
Adding a SubFolder name to his URL makes for a more human-readable URL too.
He just made a mistake in the exclusivity of his first Mapping Route.
The problem is it was matching on everything.
Just because you have "settings/" in your MapRoute doesn't mean it will apply only to incoming URL's.
MVC will use your MapRoute Logic to figure how you would like to write your URL's too!
The Fix (Option 1 - Use MapRoute):
routes.MapRoute(
name: "Settings",
url: "Settings/{controller}/{action}/{id}",
defaults: new { action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional },//Remove the Default Controller as we want to explicitly require it and constrain it. - 08/26/2018 - MCR.
constraints: new { controller = "Users|Admins" }//If you have other Controllers under a SubFolder (say we also had AdminsController.cs), then simply Pipe-Delimit them. - 08/26/2018 - MCR.
);
This is the way I've chosen to go, but if you want tighter control, you could use the Option below instead.
The Fix (Option 2 - Use Route-Attributes):
First, make sure you enable this feature by adding routes.MapMvcAttributeRoutes():
public class RouteConfig
{
public static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes)
{
routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}");
routes.MapMvcAttributeRoutes();//Add this BEFORE MapRoute for Route-Attributes to work.
Next, Decorate your Controller with the following Attributes:
(You may even include Default/Optional Values, just like in your MapRoute.)
[RoutePrefix("Settings/Users")]//Add your ParentFolder and Include your Controller name too.
[Route("{action=Index}/{id?}")]//You need this if you are using the RoutePrefix Attribute. Without this, you will need to define "[Route]" above every Action-Method. - 08/26/2018 - MCR.
public class UsersController : Controller
Note:
If you use Route-Attributes instead of MapRoute, then you will not be able to hit the
Controller without the "Settings" Prefix.
With the Custom and Default MapRoutes, you could have accessed your controller either way.
By decorating your Controller with these Attributes, you now force it to only use this exact path.
This may be what you want, but if you start IIS Express from Visual Studio on one of your Views,
then it will not find it because Visual Studio does not know to add the RoutePrefix for you.
I say this, so you are not discouraged when you start debugging and think it doesn't work.
See this link for more information about Attribute-Routing:
https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/webdev/2013/10/17/attribute-routing-in-asp-net-mvc-5/
The folder structure of your controllers here has very little relevance to what you are seeing. You could maintain that structure and accomplish your goal if the route would work.
However, you've specified two matching routes that can be used to encode the same action, and it is simply giving the first one priority. See, routes don't just work forwards, MVC uses them in reverse, too, to process your ____Action() statements. You could specify a named route (e.g. "settings") in your RedirectToAction("Index", "welcome"), by using RedirectToRoute instead, or manually specify all the routes that have prefixes in your route table. but why start your project off with intentionally conflicting routes like this?
As Joe R said, Areas will make your life easier. Why? Mainly because there is an additional built-in route parameter to do exactly what you want. Really, the question becomes "why avoid Areas?"
Looks like the answer not answering the question, because IMHO, we use Area when we need mini program under our main program,
ie. Forum, (Comprehensive) Blog, Marketplace (under our main site) either forum.mainsite.com or mainsite.com/forum
So you DONT need Area in your case
Solutions :
FYI, routing are something that have nothing to do with your architecture / structure / foldering in your applications.
In Example your ControllerName is SettingsUsersController
routes.MapRoute(
name: "settings",
url: "settings/users/{action}/{id}",
defaults: new { controller = "SettingsUsers", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional }
);
in your case, you can fix your routing like this (this is for making sure you have pretty url but still simple Controller structure):
routes.MapRoute(
name: "settings",
url: "settings/{controller}/{action}/{id}",
defaults: new { controller = "SettingsUsers", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional }
);
Your ControllerName would be SettingsUsersController
SettingsUsersController.cs
public class SettingsUsersController : Controller
{
public ActionResult Index()
{
return View("~/Views/SettingsUsers/Index.cshtml", db.YourDBName.ToList());
}
}
And why 404? I think because you are not "routing" correctly your View, you should do make subfolder like this under your Views Folder Views/SettingsUsers/Index.cshtml
Related
I have a work-around, but I'd really like to know why this doesn't appear to work in MVC. (.Net 4.6.1)
I have a controller which I want to use a RoutePrefix:
[RoutePrefix("entry")]
public class DefaultController : Controller
{
[HttpGet]
[Route(), Route("Index")]
public ActionResult Index()
{
// ...
}
}
In the route config:
routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}");
routes.MapMvcAttributeRoutes();
routes.MapRoute(
name: "Default",
url: "{controller}/{action}/{id}",
defaults: new { controller = "entry", action = "index", id = UrlParameter.Optional }
The issue is that with this configuration, running under local IIS to test, navigating to "localhost/testApp/entry" works, "localhost/testApp/entry/index" works, however the default "localhost/testApp/" results in a 404.
This has been doing my head in because on a fresh project with the default controllers and a default set to "home" and "index" the "localhost/testApp" would render Home/Index without an issue.
I narrowed it down to the RoutePrefix being the issue. If I remove the RoutePrefix and change the defaults to: new { controller = "default", action = "index", id = UrlParameter.Optional }
Then "localhost/testApp" works, but obviously this requires using /default for other routes rather than /entry.
Also, if I leave the prefix in (switching the default controller back to "entry") and add Route("~/") to the Index method, then "localhost/testApp" also works as according to the doco that a ~ route overrides the route prefix.
I'd like to know if there is an explanation why RoutePrefix doesn't seem to play nice with default routing? I'm fine with adding a ~/ route for that default action, but it seems I'm missing some understanding on how RoutePrefix is intended to be used.
Action attribute routing has the highest priority. If you use it only route attributes will be working, everything else will be ignored. You can to one action as many routes as you need.
Since you have 2 variants - Route() and Route("Index") it works only for 2 urls -"localhost/testApp/entry" and "localhost/testApp/entry/index".
if you remove Route() it will work only for one url-lcalhost/testApp/entry/index".
If you add 3rd Route("~/") it will work for 3rd url "localhost/testApp"
Sign ~ means that any prefixes should be ignored, it starts from root.
So you can not use default conventional routing on Index action since it is only obeys routing attributes.
Also, you have a controller [RoutePrefix("entry")] attribute routing too and it that next highest priority and because of this it overrides your convention routing in the config file. This is why default routing doesn't work for this controller and it doesn't go to Index automaticaly. To make default route work you need to remove route prefix and fix web config
defaults: new { controller = "default", action = "index", id = UrlParameter.Optional }
Current default controller = "entry" doesn't exist at all.
So you have two choices to have Index as default route action - remove all attribute routing and lost all another extra routes or add one more.
Thanks to Serge for helping point out a bad assumption I had about [RoutePrefix]. The problem here turns out that [RoutePrefix] is not a substitute name for a controller, (though that is how it behaves on the surface) but rather a prefix to each individual action. While the mapping in the URL will be identical:
Example 1:
public class EntryController
{
public ActionResult Index() { ... }
}
Example 2:
[RoutePrefix("Entry")]
public class DefaultController
{
[Route("Index")]
public ActionResult Index() { ... }
}
Both of these examples would resolve "localhost/testApp/entry/index", however only the first mapping would be considered as a match for {controller}/{action} and resolve a "defaults" mapping of "entry/index".
So if an action /w Attribute-based routing needs to be made a root default you need to explicitly declare it as the root using [Route()] if there is no [RoutePrefix], or [Route("~/")] if there is a [RoutePrefix]. since it won't be included in the {controller}/{action} routing. (Verified by removing the Default {controller}/{action} routing entirely).
I have a project that I am upgrading from MVC 2 -> MVC 4. During the transition from MVC 2 -> MVC 3, I noticed that some of my hyperlinks broke and were no longer matching the routes as defined before. I have the following project structure:
...
App_Data
Areas
Test
Controllers
TestController
Views
Models
Controllers
PartialController
Views
Scripts
...
The links that are generated are in the format /Test/Partial/Render. If I go back and run the project before the migration, the PartialController Render action is hit as expected. However, now the app says that it can't find an action because there is no Test/Partial controller. I actually am not sure how it worked before, but can't seem to get it to map correctly.
Is there something I'm missing? Here is the relevant code:
Global.asax.cs:
...
AreaRegistration.RegisterAllAreas();
RegisterRoutes(RouteTable.Routes);
...
routes.MapRoute(
name: "Default",
url: "{controller}/{action}/{id}",
defaults: new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = "" }
);
TestAreaRegistration.cs:
context.MapRoute(
"Test_default",
"Test/{controller}/{action}/{id}",
new { action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional }
);
I did move the Controllers folder up a level to be more in-line with how the project should be structured; beforehand it was in the Areas folder itself. However, none of this worked before I moved that, so I doubt that is the case. I also thought that Autofac had something to do with this, but I am less certain of that because if I shave the "Test" portion out of the URL it matches as expected.
I guess this all boils down to a question on how to check in a "generic" controllers directory first, before matching to an area-specific controller directory, even with an area specified in the URL.
Thanks in advance for your help!
EDIT: If it helps, I noticed that in the existing MVC 2 solution, if I go to Test/Home for example, it will invoke the Index method of the HomeController. However, this does not happen in the new solution. Is this because there is no View associated with the new routes? I have not made new .cshtml files for each of the corresponding .ascx files yet, but I didn't think that should matter much as they are used otherwise.
So apparently the issue was related to namespaces. I had seen that answer on questions like this, but those had to do with collisions finding views. Here is the line I ended up adding to each of my Area registrations:
context.MapRoute(
"Test_default",
"Test/{controller}/{action}/{id}",
new { action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional },
new string[] { "Project.Web.Controllers", "Project.Web.Areas.Test.Controllers" } //added this line
);
I code lots of ASP.NET but I'm kind of new with .net MVC, I've a default route registered like this:
routes.MapRoute(
"Default", // Route name
"{controller}/{action}/{id}", // URL with parameters
new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional } // Parameter defaults
);
And I want to add another Administrator area on the site and all the URL would be something like "http://localhost/Administrator/controller1", "http://localhost/Administrator/controller2", etc. I've lot of controllers in the Administrator namespace and I'm trying to register those controller with only one MapRoute, I did something like this:
routes.MapRoute("Administrator_default", "Administrator/{controller}/{action}/{id}", new { controller = "Administrator", action = "Index", id = "" });
it works with those controller but one problem is that in some other controller while I try to do a redirect like:
return RedirectToAction("Index", "Forum");
Then I'll always be redirect to http://localhost/Administrator/Forum instead of http://localhost/Forum, it's not a big issue but make the URL looks strange, I tried to restrict to certain namespace but it's not working. It looks just as I'm trying to register two default route and .Net just match the first one, I'm wondering is there a way to make it two default route and map on only specific path only?
This exact issue is why Areas were added to MVC 2. http://www.asp.net/whitepapers/what-is-new-in-aspnet-mvc#_TOC3_2
Agree with Zach's answer.
Not ideal, but you do have the option to have controllers in the controller root folder (e.g. /controllers/HomeController.cs) of your project as well as the controllers in Areas (maybe high level root pages that display menus for areas).
Secondly a quick tip on using the RedirectToAction method. You can specify the area you would like to redirect too using the route parameters e.g:
RedirectToAction("Index","Form", new { area = "MyOtherArea" });
Can someone please explain what the following function does. I am learning Asp.net MVC and unable to understand which controller is called when and renders which view.
public static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes)
{
routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}");
//register custom routes (plugins, etc)
var routePublisher = EngineContext.Current.Resolve<IRoutePublisher>();
routePublisher.RegisterRoutes(routes);
routes.MapRoute(
"Default", // Route name
"{controller}/{action}/{id}", // URL with parameters
new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional },
new[] { "Nop.Web.Controllers" }
);
}
This code is from nopCommerce source-code. I can't understand the URL routing for this project
The logic for this is in the System.Web.Mvc.MvcHandler class, the System.Web.Mvc.DefaultControllerFactory class, and the System.Web.Mvc.ControllerActionInvoker class. .NET Reflector is your friend.
Basically, the MVC framework:
Uses reflection to get all the controllers in the application project.
Then it does something like IEnumerable<string> controllerNames = controllerTypes.Select(controllerType => controllerType.Name.Replace("Controller",string.Empty));. It then tries to match the first path segment, {controller}, to one of these sanitized controller type names (case-insensitive).
Then, it looks at this controller's public methods that have a return type that is of type ActionResult or some derivative. It matches the method name to the second path segment, {action}, as the action method to be called.
If the selected method has a parameter that is named id, then it matches the third path segment {id} to that value, and passes it to the method. Otherwise, the optional id parameter is ignored.
If the ActionResult type that is returned is a derivative of ViewResultBase then the IViewEngine tries to locate a corresponding view in the project using whatever conventions have been specified for that view engine. The WebFormViewEngine, for example, looks in the project for ~/Views/{controller}/{action}.ascx, ~/Views/{controller}/{action}.aspx, ~/Views/Shared/{action}.ascx, ~/Views/Shared/{action}.aspx by default.
If you want to further understand how routing works in MVC, I would highly suggest Scott Gu's article on MVC Routing.
As far as the IRoutePublisher method, that looks like a nopCommerce specific method that automatically registers additional routes specific to nopCommerce's configuration. If you are interested in how nopCommerce's specific routing conventions work, you can download the source code from the nopCommerce codeplex page and do a search for its default IRoutePublisher implementation.
Update The default IRoutePublisher is here: http://nopcommerce.codeplex.com/SourceControl/changeset/view/7e34dd9d98f3#src%2fPresentation%2fNop.Web.Framework%2fMvc%2fRoutes%2fRoutePublisher.cs . Basically, it gets all implementations of IRouteProvider and registers their route definitions in order according to their priority.
The default route providers are: Nop.Web.Infrastructure.RouteProvider and Nop.Web.Infrastructure.UpgradeRouteProvider
nopCommerce employs a loosely coupled infrastructure that registers routes for each plugin separately.
So If you need to understand what's going on, check the nopCommerce source code and look for RouteProvider classes, that each plugin has. They are dynamically loaded on application start.
If you need to create your own routes, you can still do that the traditional way -- but be aware, that there might be some clashes.
(Disclaimer: I just looked at the source code, don't know anything else about it).
I have to create a site structure like this
/demo/
/demo/admin/create
/demo/admin/edit/id
I can create a DemoController which will contains admin. But how to show create/edit pages? The create/edit pages can be accessible only after user is logged in. Where to put create/edit pages?
If you are certain that you should implement strictly that URL strusture, then maybe "areas" solution would fit you (though not sure, just had a brief view). But I think, that for a small project you could simply make:
separate "admin" controller (that would lead to /demo, /admin/create, /admin/edit/id);
or you could possibly use custom ASP.NET Routing;
As for the authorization, you should look into ASP.NET Web Application Security and User authentication and authorisation in ASP.NET MVC
All you need to do is create a route for /demo/admin, then assign that route to a new controller called DemoAdminController. To make this only accessible to logged in users, you use the Windows Forms authentication system. A sample is provided with the default application generated by MVC.
i agree an area should do the trick or you can add a custom route that points the the controller if you want to lock down the whole section as an admin only section i think areas would be the way to go on this one
Pretty old question, Google landed me here right now.
There is also another way to reach the goal: the Route and RoutePrefix attribute.
Just a small chunk of code for reference.
[RoutePrefix("demo")]
public class DemoController : Controller
{
[Route("")]
public ActionResult Index() { } // default route: /demo
[Route("admin/create")]
public ActionResult Create() { } // /demo/admin/create
[Route("admin/edit/{id}")]
public ActionResult Edit(int id) { } // /demo/admin/edit/5
}
For this to work, the attribute routing must be enabled. In most case is enough to add:
routes.MapMvcAttributeRoutes();
in RouteConfig.cs.
Example:
public static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes)
{
routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}");
routes.MapMvcAttributeRoutes();
routes.MapRoute(
name: "Default",
url: "{controller}/{action}/{id}",
defaults: new { controller = "Dashboard", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional }
);
}
I think you are looking to use Areas. See docs here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee671793.aspx