Create a T4MVC ActionLink with url fragment

Question

Is there a way to create a strongly typed T4MVC ActionLink with a hash/pound/fragment in it?

For example, here is the link I'd like to create:

<a href="/Home/Index#food">Feed me</a>

But there's no extension to the T4MVC object that can do this.

<%= Html.ActionLink("Feed me", T4MVC.Home.Index()) %>

So, what I end up having to do is create an action, and then embed it that way:

<a href="<%= Url.Action(T4MVC.Home.Index()) %>"#food>Feed me</a>

This isn't very desirable. Anyone have any ideas/suggestions?

Thanks in advance

Answer 1

In ASP.NET MVC 2.0 new helpers have been added that allow you to specify the fragment. Example:

<%= Html.ActionLink("Feed me", "Action", "Controller", null, null, "food", null, null) %>

Answer 2

This kind of approach is the only one i can think of that feels (to me) slightly better than writing anchor manually:

${Html.ActionLink("Feed me", T4MVC.Home.Index(), Fragment: "food")}

Apart from spark viewengine - it costs 1 good old htmlhelper extension method & named parameters.

---

I assume that this isn't available in the default viewengine? I've decided to write a quick extension for the ActionLink, but it's not elegant, and I would have liked any solution to be available to others in future versions of T4MVC.

Spark replaces <%=%> with ${}. Mentioned just because I prefer it (You should try it if You emphasize code elegance). C# 4.0 is required in order to use named parameters.

That's because I would like to avoid losing information to which parameter "food" argument maps.

---

And yeah, i strongly agree with Mattias Jakobsson.

Answer 3

Update: This overload is included with T4MVC 2.6.56

Yes, for completeness we should probably add this to T4MVC. It should be easy to do, except we'll end up with a lot of overload if we start adding protocol/hostname as well.

Things would be easier if we stopped supporting Fx 3.5, because we could rely on default/named params, which help a lot with reducing overload hell. But I've been avoiding that step so far because not everyone is on 4.0 yet.

Maybe I should freeze the current version as the last Fx 3.5/MVC 1.x compatible, and then only support Fx 4.0/MVC 2 in newer builds (while keeping the old one up indefinitely). Anyway, I'm digressing :)