I've just started experimenting with ImageResizer. Everything has worked great so far. But I've yet to find a way to render an image to the browser in my MVC code. At the moment I'm using WebImage to do it, as follows:
WebImage webImage = new WebImage(image);
webImage.Write();
WebImage is included in System.Web.Helpers. I'd like to have ImageResizer do this if it can.
ImageResizer's ImageJob class can read/write from any Stream instance.
You can provide a MemoryStream or Response.OutputStream to have ImageResizer write it directly to output, similar to how WebImage does.
However, using ImageResizer within an MVC action is not a best practice. You are sacrificing disk caching and quite a bit of performance, as well as compatibility with many of the plugins.
Related
I have a webpage that needs to be able to generate and later read barcodes. But i cannot seem to find any small scale addon to aurelia that does even one of these. Is there any libary that does this or do i have to write my own somehow? Or can i somehow use some preexisting barcode stuff that is not directly designed for aurelia?
looks like you have to find a suitable library for the task on npm.
For barcode generation, you can use this test app:
https://codesandbox.io/embed/barcodes-bxgf1
Be sure to adapt to your own bundling choice.
I used quaggaJS in my aurelia app for reading existing bar codes.
(it's actually just a regular JS package - not specially for aurelia)
the API is kind of old (callbacks instead of promises), and overall it's a little weird (the Initialization process), but in the end it works great with little effort.
you can use https://www.npmjs.com/package/qr-scanner only draw back is that your website need to be https.
Hi I am working on large file upload component. I am looking for efficient way of uploading large files. I googled and found few does by slicing the large files and uploading asynchronously. I am looking for the similar implementation in Wicket. Is there any similar way in Wicket to achieve the same?
You could look into integrating Wicket with jQuery FileUpload which supports asynchronous and chunked uploads.
There is a tutorial and a working example on GitHub. I have used this solution for multi-file upload in two projects and it works great.
I am converting a good old ASP.Net website to a single page application using Ember.js in a ASP.NET Web API project.
All the devs of my team and myself are pretty new to javascript. We spent the last 2 weeks learning the basis and comparing SPA frameworks. I apologize in advance if my question sounds stupid :)
All the Ember tutorials I have found so far included all Handlebars templates into one single file. I assumed it would be pretty obvious to split them into separates files (*.hbs) when the time would come, but it's not. I might be totally missing something here, but I found about 4 ways to get my templates back when I need them. I'd like to know which method you would recommend:
Concatenate and then inject all the template files when the app loads. I could write some C# code on the server-side that concatenates all the templates files into a single one when the app loads (i.e. each time a visitor enter the app). It seems odd to me, in terms of processing, but also because the generated HTML file will be pretty heavy.
Load each template dynamically via Ajax when I need it. Pretty much what is done here. I kinda like this solution even though I haven't tried it yet. It makes sense to me to get asynchronously a template when I need it instead of loading the entire app on the first load.
Use the Bundling mechanism of Asp.Net MVC. I found stuff like csharp-ember-handlebars to precompile the templates on the server-side and return them as a single javascript file. It works-ish but I feel like the precompiled file will become pretty heavy as I add new templates.
Use Grunt with the plugin grunt-ember-handlebars to precompile the templates. I'm not familiar with Grunt but if I understand well all the devs working on the project will have to install Node.js + Grunt + learn how to use a command prompt + remember to run the command before each commit (if they modified a template). This is not obvious for the web designers. And adding grunt to the build actions will require the entire dev team (working on other projects) to have grunt on their machine (not acceptable).
I need to find a simple and elegant solution to address this issue. My project is in a solution with 35 other projects and I cannot add too much complexity to the build, neither depend on unstable libraries. Maybe I have been too optimistic when I thought I could use Ember for my project. Any suggestion would be welcome!
Your #3 is the most ideal (and common) way that I've seen applications handle templates. With a compiled and minified template file you really don't have to worry to much about performance problems in regards to adding new templates, especially if you take advantage of caching.
One benefit to having the templates compiled and available off-the-bat is that users only need to Download Your Resources Once™, as apposed to downloading resources for each subsequent page load. This leads to a fantastic user experience.
I read Scott Gu's article about built-in support for bundling and minification in ASP .NET 4.5.
However there's no mention of embedded resources, which is a pity.
In the past I've been using a Codeplex project called Client Dependency Framework which supported embedded resources.
Seems like a pretty major omission to me. Is support planned?
I'm pretty sure you could write your own transformer to handle this.
Create a class that implements System.Web.Optimization.IBundleTransform.
Then in the Process method get the contents of the embedded resource. This shouldn't be too difficult. This blog post might be helpful.
Then add the transform to the bundle.
e.g.
var bundle = new Bundle("~/Test").Include("~/Content/Site.css");
bundle.Transforms.Add(new EmbeddedResourceTransformer());
Note that I am using the nuget package from System.Web.Optimization, not Microsoft.Web.Optimization (I have no idea why there are two different namespace implementations, and whether the syntax would be the same in both).
I also can't vouch for the performance of doing it this way as opposed to the file system.
Hope that helps!
Just a few comments on above answers since I don't have enough rep. to comment directly...
The answer from Hainesy suggests using a BundleTransform. I believe this is too late in the process to include an embedded resource. The BundleTransform is helpful for converting things inside the css or javascript after the contents are pulled from the original file and before they are put into the bundled file. For example, if you need to modify image URL's in CSS to point to local relative url for dev and to a CDN url for production.
The link from user960567 explains how to use embedded resources, but there's a catch. That process will only work for something like a common control used from another project.
e.g. If you create a textbox that needs CSS and JS then it allows you to create a HTML helper in the common project that will add the textbox and the script tags that pull in the embedded resource into the page. It does not allow you to pull the embedded resource from the common project into a bundle in another project. This will basically create a separate script or style tag for each embedded resource which may not be what you want (at least it's not what I was looking for.)
I've written a detailed article about how you can use the bundle and minification technology to wrap up your external resources here.
I've previously asked a question about designing a service that receives video files, sends them to an encoding service, waits for the encoding to be completed, and then downloads the files.
I started writing the code for that and one of my workmates suggested I use .Net 4.0 new features, instead of writing it using BackgroundWorker. I've done some reading and the Parallel feature sounds great. Are there any more new features I should implement? I'm new to .net 4.0.
Thanks!
Parallel Extensions is certainly one good option here. Another you might want to consider is Reactive Extensions, which implements a "push" model instead. It takes a little while to get your head round, but it's very elegant - and might work very well with your asynchronous model.