Extended OrderBy

Extension methods for OrderBy and ThenBy methods, introducing two new features:
* The possibility to determine sort direction ascending/descending by passing a boolean value, rather than using a whole different method.
* The possibility to pass a string value for the property to sort by, which will be resolved using reflection

Both features may come in handy when sorting depends upon user input, such as the ability to resort a table by clicking table headers.

Courtesy of David Hedlund.

public static IOrderedEnumerable<TResult> OrderBy<TResult>(this IEnumerable<TResult> source, string propertyName)
{
   return OrderBy(source, propertyName, true);
}

public static IOrderedEnumerable<TResult> OrderByDescending<TResult>(this IEnumerable<TResult> source, string propertyName)
{
   return OrderBy(source, propertyName, false);
}

public static IOrderedEnumerable<TResult> OrderBy<TResult>(this IEnumerable<TResult> source, string propertyName, bool ascending)
{
   System.Reflection.PropertyInfo prop = typeof(TResult).GetProperty(propertyName);
   Func<TResult, object> orderBy = (i => prop.GetValue(i, null));
   return source.OrderBy(orderBy, ascending);
}

public static IOrderedEnumerable<TResult> OrderBy<TResult,TKey>(this IEnumerable<TResult> source, Func<TResult, TKey> keySelector, bool ascending)
{
   Func<Func<TResult, TKey>, IOrderedEnumerable<TResult>> orderMethod = source.OrderBy;

   if(!ascending)
      orderMethod = source.OrderByDescending;

   return orderMethod.Invoke(keySelector);
}

public static IOrderedEnumerable<TResult> ThenBy<TResult>(this IOrderedEnumerable<TResult> source, string propertyName)
{
   return ThenBy(source, propertyName, true);
}

public static IOrderedEnumerable<TResult> ThenByDescending<TResult>(this IOrderedEnumerable<TResult> source, string propertyName)
{
   return ThenBy(source, propertyName, false);
}

public static IOrderedEnumerable<TResult> ThenBy<TResult>(this IOrderedEnumerable<TResult> source, string propertyName, bool ascending)
{
   System.Reflection.PropertyInfo prop = typeof(TResult).GetProperty(propertyName);
   Func<TResult, object> orderBy = (i => prop.GetValue(i, null));
   return source.ThenBy(orderBy, ascending);
}

public static IOrderedEnumerable<TResult> ThenBy<TResult,TKey>(this IOrderedEnumerable<TResult> source, Func<TResult, TKey> keySelector, bool ascending)
{
   Func<Func<TResult, TKey>, IOrderedEnumerable<TResult>> orderMethod = source.ThenBy;

   if(!ascending)
      orderMethod = source.ThenByDescending;

   return orderMethod.Invoke(keySelector);
}

Removing a subdirectory from your application will cost you your session state

Encountered a curious error, with users being logged out from an admin application, when they removed a folder. Turns out the behavior is by design: Removing a folder anywhere in your application, programatically or manually, will cause a full AppDomain recycle, in just the same manner as uploading a DLL file to bin or making a change to web.config does, and that's all there's to it.

Managed to come up with only one work-around, that'll still allow the file change notifier to monitor web.config and bin directory, and it's not very pretty, but it seems to work:

private void SafelyDeleteFolder(string folder, bool recursive)
{
   //FIX disable AppDomain restart when deleting subdirectory
   //This code will turn off monitoring from the root website directory.
   //Monitoring of Bin, App_Themes and other folders will still be operational, so updated DLLs will still auto deploy.

   System.Reflection.PropertyInfo p = typeof(HttpRuntime).GetProperty("FileChangesMonitor", System.Reflection.BindingFlags.NonPublic | System.Reflection.BindingFlags.Public | System.Reflection.BindingFlags.Static);

   object o = p.GetValue(null, null);
   System.Reflection.FieldInfo f = o.GetType().GetField("_dirMonSubdirs", System.Reflection.BindingFlags.Instance | System.Reflection.BindingFlags.NonPublic | System.Reflection.BindingFlags.IgnoreCase);

   object monitor = f.GetValue(o);
   System.Reflection.MethodInfo m = monitor.GetType().GetMethod("StopMonitoring", System.Reflection.BindingFlags.Instance | System.Reflection.BindingFlags.NonPublic);
   m.Invoke(monitor, new object[] { });

   System.IO.Directory.Delete(folder, recursive);
}

Default AJAX Object for calling WebMethods from jQuery

Calling WebMethods from jQuery is a neat way of dealing with AJAX requests, both on the client- and serverside, but the AJAX object expected by jQuery requires a lot of parameters to be set, in order to work properly with .NET WebMethods. Properties that usually remain constant, yet always have to be previded (i.e. a lot of unnecessary duplication of code). To resolve the issue, I have written the following snippet:

Object.prototype.toAjaxObject = function()
{
   if(!this.type) this.type = 'POST';
   if(!this.contentType) this.contentType = 'application/json; charset=utf-8';
   if(!this.dataType) this.dataType = 'json';

   if(!this.url && typeof this.method == 'string')
   {
      this.url = location.href.substring(0, location.href.indexOf('?')) + '/' + this.method.toString();
      this.method = undefined;
   }

   if(typeof this.data != 'string' && typeof JSON =='object')
      if(typeof JSON.stringify == 'function')
         this.data = JSON.stringify(this.data);

   return this;
}

The above code adds an extension method to all JavaScript objects, which populates some properties with default values provided that these values have not already been set. Hence, you can still always override the use of any default value, at will.

As added value, there is a check for whether the data parameter is an object, and the function JSON.stringify is defined. If they are, data will be stringified. That is, if you know you're working in a project where JSON serialization functions will always be at hand, you can pass the data object as a custom JSON object, rather than a valid JSON-parseable string.

Another feature is that the url parameter is not required. Instead, it is possible to pass a method parameter, which will set url to a WebMethod call to that method, assuming the current url is used, and then remove the method parameter from the object. For this to work, it is required that url is not set.

Including the above snippet, it is therefore possible to reduce this piece of code code:

$.ajax({
   type: 'POST',
   url: 'MyPage.aspx/GetUser',
   contentType: 'application/json; charset=utf-8',
   dataType: 'json',
   data: '{"id":'+id+'"}',
   success: myCallback
});

To the following:

$.ajax({
   method: 'GetUser',
   data: {id:id},
   success: myCallback
}.toAjaxObject());

Again, provided that a serializer function called JSON.stringify is present. Otherwise, the data property must still be passed as a string in the manner of the first example.

Update

Looks like jQuery wasn't quite ready for object extension like this. The code works fine, but what Object.prototype does is to extend all Objects with some new functionality. Ran in to trouble as dialog wasn't prepared that the object passed might be extended with a function like this one. Eventually retorted to what feels pretty much like a hack. I would rather see that the jQuery UI team fixed up their components to allow the use of regular JavaScript like this, but for now, the following will do the trick:

$.ajaxCore = $.ajax;
$.ajax = function(opts)
{
   var addDefaults = arguments[0] ? arguments[0] : false;
   if(addDefaults)
   {
      if(!opts.type) opts.type = 'POST';
      if(!opts.contentType) opts.contentType = 'application/json; charset=utf-8';
      if(!opts.dataType) opts.dataType = 'json';

      if(!opts.url && typeof opts.method == 'string')
      {
         opts.url = location.href.substring(0, location.href.indexOf('?')) + '/' + opts.method.toString();
         opts.method = undefined;
      }

      if(typeof opts.data != 'string' && typeof JSON =='object')
         if(typeof JSON.stringify == 'function')
            opts.data = JSON.stringify(opts.data);
   }

   $.ajaxCore(opts);
}

The method call should, then, be modified accordingly:

$.ajax({
   method: 'GetUser',
   data: {id:id},
   success: myCallback
}, true);

Potentially dangerous Request in MVC

While developing an admin-page in MVC I kept getting the old "Potentially dangerous Request..." which occurs when trying to submit form data including html tags.

After adding the "validateRequest=false" to the pages-element in web.config (which turns this feature off in asp.net webforms) and checking that the page directive didn't ovveride this setting I was getting quite annoyed that I still got the exception on my page.

However - in MVC you need to set an attribute on your action in the controller to turn off validation:

[ValidateInput(false)]
public ActionResult Edit(int id, FormCollection collection)
{}

In my opionon I think that the setting is web.config should be read by the MVC actions as well as you otherwise need to define this attribute on all actions that might include html as a string parameter.

JavaScript context binding

One of the neatest features in the JavaScript library Prototype is its helper function for context binding. This is one feature to which I have yet to find the correspondence in jQuery. The following code is the functional equivalent of the Prototype solution, which I've found use for too many times:

<script type="text/javascript">
Function.prototype.bind = function(context)
{
   var __method = this;
   var __args = new Array();

   for(it = 1; it < arguments.length; it++)
      __args.push(arguments[it]);

   return function() {
      for(ait = 0; ait < arguments.length; ait++)
         __args.push(arguments[ait]);

      __method.apply(context, __args)
   };
}
</script>

So what does it do? Well, it makes sure that all functions will have a function of their own, called bind. Bind receives a context, and makes sure that the function is always invoked from that context - i.e. that the "this." notation in the function will always reference the given context.

This solves a common JavaScript problem, when working with callback functions. Consider the following:

function User(username, password)
{
   this.username = username;
   this.password = password;
   this.tryLogin = function()
   {
      $.ajax({
         type: "POST",
         url: "Default.aspx/Login",
         ...
         success: function(msg)
         {
            if(msg == 'true')
               alert('Welcome '+this.username);
         }
   }
}

In the above code, the function passed along as a callback will be called from the jQuery AJAX handler, hence "this.username" will look for a username property in $.ajax() (and presumably fail to find one). Now, if we had included the snippet at the top of this entry, we would've been able to modify the callback declaration to the following:

success: function(msg)
{
   alert('Welcome '+this.username);
}.bind(this);

Here, instead of passing in assigning the success property with function x, we're passing x to bind, and assigning the value that bind returns, which is x hooked up to a specified context (this, as passed to bind).

For added value, bind also comes with the option to specify additional arguments to be passed along to the function, as it is being invoked. To demonstrate why this is useful, consider the following scenario:

<button id="btn0">Button0</button>
<button id="btn1">Button1</button>
<button id="btn2">Button2</button>
<script type="text/javascript">
function Person(name) {
   this.name = name;
   this.logClick = function(x) {
      alert(this.name + ' clicked button ' + x);
   };
   this.start = function() {
      for(var i = 0; i < 3; i++)
      {
         $('#btn'+i).onclick = function() { this.logClick(i) }.bind(this);
      }
   };
}

var p = new Person('Test');
p.start();
</script>

Now, the start function will hook up the three buttons with onclick events that will trigger the highlighted function. The bind is there, so we will be able to access this.name in logClick without a problem, but our desired effect here - to get Button1, say, to alert "Test clicked button 1" - will still not be met: the i parameter won't be accessed until the actual click event occurs, and by then, the for loop will have completed, and i will have the value of "3". All buttons will produce the same output. What we want, here, is to tell the function to use the value that the variable contained at the time of the event wireup. Again, bind comes to the rescue:

$('#btn'+i).onclick = function(x) { this.logClick(x) }.bind(this, i);

The above modification will solve the issue, and produce the desired output. Now that we're binding the parameter in bind, we can, of course, get rid of the delegate entirely:

$('#btn'+i).onclick = this.logClick.bind(this, i);

Making the JsonResult in MVC ignore a property

In MVC each controller action returns an "ActionResult". This can be a View, Content (plain text) or JsonResult for example. With JsonResult the output will (obviously) be serialized to JSON.

However - when using any serializeri on classes with bi-directional fields/properties you will run into problems as the serialization will lead to a endless loop trying to follow the bi-directional fields back and forth.

Using other serializer such as an XML serializer for example you just tag the bi-directional property with an "XMLIgnore" attribute and the serializer will basically ignore the field during serialization.

But trying to find a way for the JsonResult was not very easy as there is basically no subjects on this to be found using Google (at this time). However, using Reflector I found that the JsonResult is using the serializer "JavaScriptSerializer" found in "System.Web.Scrtipt.Serializer" (System.Web.Extensions.dll version 3.5). Following the code I found that the attribute to use to ignore a field is "ScriptIgnore" also found in "System.Web.Script.Serialization".

So, problem solved: Use the "ScriptIgnore" attribute to make the Json serializer in MVC ignore your bi-directional fields!

SEO-friendly 404 Exceptions

Custom 404 pages is a simple means of approaching a user-friendly experience even in the (albeit rather specific) case of an unhandled exception. In order to take the step from user-friendly to SEO-friendly, however, merely adjusting the customErrors tag in web.config is sub-par.

The problem
Modifying customErrors to redirect a user to a custom 404 page in the case of a fileNotFoundException will do just that - redirect the user - which means taking the detour to the client, informing of the redirect, which in turn means a 302 response from the server, before the user lands at the 404 page. The only implication of this is that search engine will fail to treat the response as a proper 404.

The solution
To resolve the issue, we have to drop the customErrors clause, and invoke Global.asax. Catching all exceptions in Global.asax, we are able to filter out the 404's, and render the appropriate site without tampering with redirects

void Application_Error(object sender, EventArgs e)
{
   HttpException ex = Server.GetLastError() as HttpException;

   if(ex != null && ex.GetHttpCode() == 404)
   {
      Response.Clear();
      Response.StatusCode = 404;
      Response.WriteFile("~/Pages/404.html");
      Response.End();
   }
}

A brief note on deployment
Finally, when deploying a project with a Global.asax file, from a web deployment project, make sure that the following files are updated:
- PrecompiledApp.config
- bin\App_global.asax.cs
- bin\App_global.asax.cs.compiled

Note that Global.asax is compiled in its entirety, and need not be uploaded to the production environment.