Action create shows form:
def create = Action {
Ok(html.post.create(postForm))
}
How can i modify this action so that for GET request it would give out form and for the POST request it would process user input data, as if it were a separate action:
def newPost = Action { implicit request =>
postForm.bindFromRequest.fold(
errors => BadRequest(views.html.index(Posts.all(), errors)),
label => {
Posts.create(label)
Redirect(routes.Application.posts)
}
)
}
Wthat i mean is i want to combine this two actions.
UPDATE1: I want a single Action that serves GET and POST requests
It is recommended not to merge both actions, but modify routes to get the behavior you are expecting. For instance:
GET /create controllers.Posts.create
POST /create controllers.Posts.newPost
In case you have several kind of resources (post and comments, for instance), just add
a prefix to the path to disambiguate:
GET /post/create controllers.Posts.create
POST /post/create controllers.Posts.newPost
GET /comment/create controllers.Comments.create
POST /comment/create controllers.Comments.newComment
I tried once to accomplish similar thing, but I realized that I wasn't using framework like it was meant to be used. Use separate GET and POST methods like #paradigmatic showed and in cases like you specified "If we take adding comments to another action, we wouldn't be able to get infomation on post and comments in case an error occured (avoding copy-paste code)." - just render the page at the end of controller method with the view you like? and for errors etc. you can always use flash scope too? http://www.playframework.org/documentation/2.0.2/ScalaSessionFlash you could also render this form page with two or more beans and send them to controller side to catch related error messages and data.?
Related
I have a few questions that I couldn't find answers anywhere online.
Does sails.js framework support HTTP PATCH method? If not - does anyone know if there is a planned feature in the future?
By default if I create method in a controller it is accessible with GET request is it the routes.js file where I need to specify that method is accessible only via POST or other type of methods?
How would you create a policy that would allow to change protected fields on entity only for specific rights having users. I.e: user that created entity can change "name", "description" fields but would not be able to change "comments" array unless user is ADMIN?
How would you add a custom header to "find" method which specifies how many items there are in database? I.e.: I have /api/posts/ and I do query for finding specific items {skip: 20; limit: 20} I would like to get response with those items and total count of items that would match query without SKIP and LIMIT modifiers. One thing that comes to my mind is that a policy that adds that that custom header would be a good choice but maybe there is a better one.
Is there any way to write a middle-ware that would be executed just before sending response to the client. I.e.: I just want to filter output JSON not to containt some values or add my own without touching the controller method.
Thank you in advance
I can help with 2 and 5. In my own experience, here is what I have done:
2) I usually just check req.method in the controller. If it's not a method I want to support, I respond with a 404 page. For example:
module.exports = {
myAction: function(req, res){
if (req.method != 'POST')
return res.notFound();
// Desired controller action logic here
}
}
5) I create services in api/services when I want to do this. You define functions in a service that accept callbacks as arguments so that you can then send your response from the controller after the service function finishes executing. You can access any service by the name of the file. For example, if I had MyService.js in api/services, and I needed it to work with the request body, I would add a function to it like this:
exports.myServiceFunction = function(requestBody, callback){
// Work with the request body and data access here to create
// data to give back to the controller
callback(data);
};
Then, I can use this service from the controller like so:
module.exports = {
myAction: function(req, res){
MyService.myServiceFunction(req.body, function(data){
res.json(data);
});
}
}
In your case, the data that the service sends back to the controller through the callback would be the filtered JSON.
I'm sorry I can't answer your other questions, but I hope this helps a bit. I'm still new to Sails.js and am constantly learning new things, so others might have better suggestions. Still, I hope I have answered two of your questions.
Let's say I have two controller methods: Users.preInsert and Users.insert. The preInsert method is the one used to display the user entry form (GET), while the insert method is responsible for the actual insertion (POST) or calling the 'insert' service.
This is how the routes looks like:
GET /users/add controllers.Users.preInsert(...)
POST /users/add controllers.Users.insert(...)
So how do I redirect a request (POST to GET) without losing the parameters like error messages returned from the insert service and the values inputed by the client so that they can be accessed and displayed in the entry form. The parameters may involve some complex objects. I have implemented it using the Caching API but I would like to know if there are any better ways of doing it.
That's the exact purpose of the Form objects (http://www.playframework.com/documentation/2.1.1/ScalaForms).
And I think there is a an error in your routes, it could look like:
GET /users/add controllers.Users.preInsert(...)
POST /users/add controllers.Users.insert(...)
You should definitively take a look at the form sample.
You don't need to redirect it back to the preInsert action, instead at the beginning of the insert check if form has errors and it it has display your view containing form (the same which you used in preInsert). It's described in the doc mentioned by nico_ekito in section Handling binding failure
I'm currently trying to connect an Extjs form to a Play! Scala backend.
I have no problem receiving the request, but
FormName.bindFromRequest.get returns to me None .
I'm able to find the data generated via submitting from Extjs in the POST request in request.request.body.data (the first request object is generated by SocialSecure's controller), whereas normally the data bound to the form would be found in request.request.body.data.elems
I think Extjs's eschewal of using <form> in their inserted HTML is what causes me this problem, but I'd still like to take advantage of Extjs's nice form verification UI.
Does Play! or Scala have any resources for modifying a request after the server has received it?
More info
This is the method my /requestAudit cuurently points to after a POST request:
def requestAudit = SecuredAction(WithProvider("google")) { // SecureSocial syntax
implicit request => { // let's call this line 0'
println(request.request.body.asFormUrlEncoded) // let's call this line 1'
println(request.body.asText) // let's call this line 2'
newAuditForm.bindFromRequest.fold(
errors => BadRequest(views.html.error(newAuditForm))
success => { /*insert the object into my db*/ }
) } }
Ext.js request
When I'm debugging in Eclipse with an Ext.js form, the Variables window shows: (click for closeup)
where the form values are located in request.body.data.key1, request.body.data.key2, etc
Bootstrap form request
On the other hand, the request for Bootstrap has the values stored in request.body.data.elems
#2manyprojects 's suggestion set me on the right path:
newAuditForm.bindFromRequest(
(request.request.body.asFormUrlEncoded).getOrElse(Map()))
.fold( ... )
worked.
I was still getting form binding errors after changing my code to this, and then I discovered a typo in the name property of one of my Ext.js form fields. The name of the field must be the same on both the UI and the Play Form.
My web application will be triggered from an external system. It will call one request path of my app, but uses different query parameters for different kinds of requests.
One of the parameters is the "action" that defines what is to be done. The rest of the params depend on the "action".
So I can get request params like these:
action=sayHello&user=Joe
action=newUser&name=Joe&address=xxx
action=resetPassword
...
I would like to be able to encode it similarly in the routes file for play so it does the query param based routing and as much of the validation of other parameters as possible.
What I have instead is one routing for all of these possibilities with plenty of optional parameters. The action processing it starts with a big pattern match to do dispatch and parameter validation.
Googling and checking SO just popped up plenty of samples where the params are encoded in the request path somehow, so multiple paths are routed to the same action, but I would like the opposite: one path routed to different actions.
One of my colleagues said we could have one "dispatcher" action that would just redirect based on the "action" parameter. It would be a bit more structured then the current solution, but it would not eliminate the long list of optional parameters which should be selectively passed to the next action, so I hope one knows an even better solution :-)
BTW the external system that calls my app is developed by another company and I have no influence on this design, so it's not an option to change the way how my app is triggered.
The single dispatcher action is probably the way to go, and you don't need to specify all of your optional parameters in the route. If action is always there then that's the only one you really need.
GET /someRoute controller.dispatcher(action: String)
Then in your action method you can access request.queryString to get any of the other optional parameters.
Note: I am NOT experienced Scala developer, so maybe presented snippets can be optimized... What's important for you they are valid and working.
So...
You don't need to declare every optional param in the routes file. It is great shortcut for type param's validation and best choice would be convince 'other company' to use API prepared by you... Anyway if you haven't such possibility you can also handle their requests as required.
In general: the dispatcher approach seems to be right in this place, fortunately you don't need to declare all optional params in the routes and pass it between actions/methods as they can be fetched directly from request. In PHP it can be compared to $_GET['action'] and in Java version of Play 2 controller - DynamicForm class - form().bindFromRequest.get("action").
Let's say that you have a route:
GET /dispatcher controllers.Application.dispatcher
In that case your dispatcher action (and additional methods) can look like:
def dispatcher = Action { implicit request =>
request.queryString.get("action").flatMap(_.headOption).getOrElse("invalid") match {
case "sayHello" => sayHelloMethod
case "newUser" => newUserMethod
case _ => BadRequest("Action not allowed!")
}
}
// http://localhost:9000/dispatcher?action=sayHello&name=John
def sayHelloMethod(implicit request: RequestHeader) = {
val name = request.queryString.get("name").flatMap(_.headOption).getOrElse("")
Ok("Hello " + name )
}
// http://localhost:9000/dispatcher?action=newUser&name=John+Doe&address=john#doe.com
def newUserMethod(implicit request: RequestHeader) = {
val name = request.queryString.get("name").flatMap(_.headOption).getOrElse("")
val address = request.queryString.get("address").flatMap(_.headOption).getOrElse("")
Ok("We are creating new user " + name + " with address " + address)
}
Of course you will need to validate incoming types and values 'manually', especially when actions will be operating on the DataBase, anyway biggest part of your problem you have resolved now.
I'd like to create filter which will switch request data. More precisely i'd like to change type of request inside filter (it have to be POST), add some values into post's Data, add return url, and redirect it to Controller's action which accepts only POST... and then in this action i'd like to return to first URL.
I've found something like...
Response.Redirect with POST instead of Get?
but i'm pretty sure i don't catch his idea completely and don't know is it useful in FIlter.
I've not found how to change request data... but useful was to
var controller = new MyController();
controller.ControllerContext = filterContext.Controller.ControllerContext;
controller.<action>(<parameters>); // it's action which accepts only POST, but here it doesn't matter
base.OnActionExecuting(filterContext);
Is there any better way to pass context or mayby... invoke Controller from current context? instead of creating new controller and calling his action?