ASP.NET Routing is useful in many situations beyond ASP.NET MVC. For example, I often need to run a tiny bit of custom code in response to a specific request URL. Let’s look at how routing can help.
First, let’s do a quick review. When you define a route, you specify an instance of IRouteHandler associated with the route which is given a chance to figure out what to do when that route matches the request. This step is typically hidden from most developers who use the various extension methods such as MapRoute.
Once the route handler makes that decision, it returns an instance of IHttpHandler which ultimately processes the request.
There are many situations in which I just have a tiny bit of code I want to run and I’d rather not have to create both a custom route handler and http handler class.
So I started experimenting with some base handlers that would allow me to pass around delegates.
Warning: the code you are about to see may cause permanent blindness. This was done for fun and I’m not advocating you use the code as-is.
It works, but the readability of all these lambda expressions may cause confusion and insanity.
One common case I need to handle is permanently redirecting a set of URLs to another set of URLs. I wrote a simple extension method of RouteCollection to do just that. In my Global.asax.cs file I can write this:
routes.RedirectPermanently("home/{foo}.aspx", "~/home/{foo}");
This will permanently redirect all requests within the home directory containing the .aspx extension to the same URL without the extension. That’ll come in pretty handy for my blog in the future.
When you define a route, you have to specify an instance of IRouteHandler which handles matching requests. That instance in turn returns an IHttpHandler which ultimately handles the request. Let’s look at the simple implementation of this RedirectPermanently method.
public static Route RedirectPermanently(this RouteCollection routes,
string url, string targetUrl) {
Route route = new Route(url, new RedirectRouteHandler(targetUrl, true));
routes.Add(route);
return route;
}
Notice that we simply create a route using the RedirectRouteHandler. As we’ll see, I didn’t even need to do this, but it helped make the code a bit more readable. To make heads or tails of this, we need to look at that handler. Warning: Some funky looking code ahead!
public class RedirectRouteHandler : DelegateRouteHandler {
public RedirectRouteHandler(string targetUrl) : this(targetUrl, false) {
}
public RedirectRouteHandler(string targetUrl, bool permanently)
: base(requestContext => {
if (targetUrl.StartsWith("~/")) {
string virtualPath = targetUrl.Substring(2);
Route route = new Route(virtualPath, null);
var vpd = route.GetVirtualPath(requestContext,
requestContext.RouteData.Values);
if (vpd != null) {
targetUrl = "~/" + vpd.VirtualPath;
}
}
return new DelegateHttpHandler(httpContext =>
Redirect(httpContext, targetUrl, permanently), false);
}) {
TargetUrl = targetUrl;
}
private void Redirect(HttpContext context, string url, bool permanent) {
if (permanent) {
context.Response.Status = "301 Moved Permanently";
context.Response.StatusCode = 301;
context.Response.AddHeader("Location", url);
}
else {
context.Response.Redirect(url, false);
}
}
public string TargetUrl { get; private set; }
}
I bolded a portion of the code within the constructor. The bolded portion is a delegate (via a lambda expression) being passed to the base constructor. Rather than creating a custom IHttpHandler class, I am telling the base class what code I would want that http handler (if I had written one) to execute in order to process the request. I pass that code as a lambda expression to the base class.
I think in a production system, I’d probably manually implement RedirectRouteHandler. But while I’m having fun, let’s take it further.
Let’s look at the DelegateRouteHandler to understand this better.
public class DelegateRouteHandler : IRouteHandler {
public DelegateRouteHandler(Func<RequestContext, IHttpHandler> action) {
HttpHandlerAction = action;
}
public Func<RequestContext, IHttpHandler> HttpHandlerAction {
get;
private set;
}
public IHttpHandler GetHttpHandler(RequestContext requestContext) {
var action = HttpHandlerAction;
if (action == null) {
throw new InvalidOperationException("No action specified");
}
return action(requestContext);
}
}
Notice that the first constructor argument is a Func<RequestContext, IHttpHandler>. This is effectively the contract for an IRouteHandler. This alleviates the need to write new IRouteHandler classes, because we can instead just create an instance of DelegateRouteHandler directly passing in the code we would have put in the custom IRouteHandler implementation. Again, in this implementation, to make things clearer, I inherited from DelegateRouteHandler rather than instantiating it directly. To do that would have sent me to the 7th level of Hades immediately. As it stands, I’m only on the 4th level for what I’ve shown here.
The last thing we need to look at is the DelegateHttpHandler.
public class DelegateHttpHandler : IHttpHandler {
public DelegateHttpHandler(Action<HttpContext> action, bool isReusable) {
IsReusable = isReusable;
HttpHandlerAction = action;
}
public bool IsReusable {
get;
private set;
}
public Action<HttpContext> HttpHandlerAction {
get;
private set;
}
public void ProcessRequest(HttpContext context) {
var action = HttpHandlerAction;
if (action != null) {
action(context);
}
}
}
Again, you simply pass this class an Action<HttpContext> within the constructor which fulfills the contract for IHttpHandler.
The point of all this is to show that when you have interfaces with a single methods, they can often be transformed into a delegate by writing a helper implementation of that interface which accepts delegates that fulfill the same contract, or at least are close enough.
This would allow me to quickly hack up a new route handler without adding two new classes to my project. Of course, the syntax to do so is prohibitively dense that for the sake of those who have to read the code, I’d probably recommend just writing the new classes.
In any case, however you implement it, the Redirect and RedirectPermanent extension methods for handling routes is still quite useful.
Technorati Tags:
aspnetmvc,
routing