Search Results

Search found 54019 results on 2161 pages for 'asp net weblogs'.

Page 45/2161 | < Previous Page | 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >

  • MvcExtensions - ActionFilter

    - by kazimanzurrashid
    One of the thing that people often complains is dependency injection in Action Filters. Since the standard way of applying action filters is to either decorate the Controller or the Action methods, there is no way you can inject dependencies in the action filter constructors. There are quite a few posts on this subject, which shows the property injection with a custom action invoker, but all of them suffers from the same small bug (you will find the BuildUp is called more than once if the filter implements multiple interface e.g. both IActionFilter and IResultFilter). The MvcExtensions supports both property injection as well as fluent filter configuration api. There are a number of benefits of this fluent filter configuration api over the regular attribute based filter decoration. You can pass your dependencies in the constructor rather than property. Lets say, you want to create an action filter which will update the User Last Activity Date, you can create a filter like the following: public class UpdateUserLastActivityAttribute : FilterAttribute, IResultFilter { public UpdateUserLastActivityAttribute(IUserService userService) { Check.Argument.IsNotNull(userService, "userService"); UserService = userService; } public IUserService UserService { get; private set; } public void OnResultExecuting(ResultExecutingContext filterContext) { // Do nothing, just sleep. } public void OnResultExecuted(ResultExecutedContext filterContext) { Check.Argument.IsNotNull(filterContext, "filterContext"); string userName = filterContext.HttpContext.User.Identity.IsAuthenticated ? filterContext.HttpContext.User.Identity.Name : null; if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(userName)) { UserService.UpdateLastActivity(userName); } } } As you can see, it is nothing different than a regular filter except that we are passing the dependency in the constructor. Next, we have to configure this filter for which Controller/Action methods will execute: public class ConfigureFilters : ConfigureFiltersBase { protected override void Configure(IFilterRegistry registry) { registry.Register<HomeController, UpdateUserLastActivityAttribute>(); } } You can register more than one filter for the same Controller/Action Methods: registry.Register<HomeController, UpdateUserLastActivityAttribute, CompressAttribute>(); You can register the filters for a specific Action method instead of the whole controller: registry.Register<HomeController, UpdateUserLastActivityAttribute, CompressAttribute>(c => c.Index()); You can even set various properties of the filter: registry.Register<ControlPanelController, CustomAuthorizeAttribute>( attribute => { attribute.AllowedRole = Role.Administrator; }); The Fluent Filter registration also reduces the number of base controllers in your application. It is very common that we create a base controller and decorate it with action filters and then we create concrete controller(s) so that the base controllers action filters are also executed in the concrete controller. You can do the  same with a single line statement with the fluent filter registration: Registering the Filters for All Controllers: registry.Register<ElmahHandleErrorAttribute>(new TypeCatalogBuilder().Add(GetType().Assembly).Include(type => typeof(Controller).IsAssignableFrom(type))); Registering Filters for selected Controllers: registry.Register<ElmahHandleErrorAttribute>(new TypeCatalogBuilder().Add(GetType().Assembly).Include(type => typeof(Controller).IsAssignableFrom(type) && (type.Name.StartsWith("Home") || type.Name.StartsWith("Post")))); You can also use the built-in filters in the fluent registration, for example: registry.Register<HomeController, OutputCacheAttribute>(attribute => { attribute.Duration = 60; }); With the fluent filter configuration you can even apply filters to controllers that source code is not available to you (may be the controller is a part of a third part component). That’s it for today, in the next post we will discuss about the Model binding support in MvcExtensions. So stay tuned.

    Read the article

  • Caveats with the runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests in IIS 7/8

    - by Rick Strahl
    One of the nice enhancements in IIS 7 (and now 8) is the ability to be able to intercept non-managed - ie. non ASP.NET served - requests from within ASP.NET managed modules. This opened up a ton of new functionality that could be applied across non-managed content using .NET code. I thought I had a pretty good handle on how IIS 7's Integrated mode pipeline works, but when I put together some samples last tonight I realized that the way that managed and unmanaged requests fire into the pipeline is downright confusing especially when it comes to the runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests attribute. There are a number of settings that can affect whether a managed module receives non-ASP.NET content requests such as static files or requests from other frameworks like PHP or ASP classic, and this is topic of this blog post. Native and Managed Modules The integrated mode IIS pipeline for IIS 7 and later - as the name suggests - allows for integration of ASP.NET pipeline events in the IIS request pipeline. Natively IIS runs unmanaged code and there are a host of native mode modules that handle the core behavior of IIS. If you set up a new IIS site or application without managed code support only the native modules are supported and fired without any interaction between native and managed code. If you use the Integrated pipeline with managed code enabled however things get a little more confusing as there both native modules and .NET managed modules can fire against the same IIS request. If you open up the IIS Modules dialog you see both managed and unmanaged modules. Unmanaged modules point at physical files on disk, while unmanaged modules point at .NET types and files referenced from the GAC or the current project's BIN folder. Both native and managed modules can co-exist and execute side by side and on the same request. When running in IIS 7 the IIS pipeline actually instantiates a the ASP.NET  runtime (via the System.Web.PipelineRuntime class) which unlike the core HttpRuntime classes in ASP.NET receives notification callbacks when IIS integrated mode events fire. The IIS pipeline is smart enough to detect whether managed handlers are attached and if they're none these notifications don't fire, improving performance. The good news about all of this for .NET devs is that ASP.NET style modules can be used for just about every kind of IIS request. All you need to do is create a new Web Application and enable ASP.NET on it, and then attach managed handlers. Handlers can look at ASP.NET content (ie. ASPX pages, MVC, WebAPI etc. requests) as well as non-ASP.NET content including static content like HTML files, images, javascript and css resources etc. It's very cool that this capability has been surfaced. However, with that functionality comes a lot of responsibility. Because every request passes through the ASP.NET pipeline if managed modules (or handlers) are attached there are possible performance implications that come with it. Running through the ASP.NET pipeline does add some overhead. ASP.NET and Your Own Modules When you create a new ASP.NET project typically the Visual Studio templates create the modules section like this: <system.webServer> <validation validateIntegratedModeConfiguration="false" /> <modules runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="true" > </modules> </system.webServer> Specifically the interesting thing about this is the runAllManagedModulesForAllRequest="true" flag, which seems to indicate that it controls whether any registered modules always run, even when the value is set to false. Realistically though this flag does not control whether managed code is fired for all requests or not. Rather it is an override for the preCondition flag on a particular handler. With the flag set to the default true setting, you can assume that pretty much every IIS request you receive ends up firing through your ASP.NET module pipeline and every module you have configured is accessed even by non-managed requests like static files. In other words, your module will have to handle all requests. Now so far so obvious. What's not quite so obvious is what happens when you set the runAllManagedModulesForAllRequest="false". You probably would expect that immediately the non-ASP.NET requests no longer get funnelled through the ASP.NET Module pipeline. But that's not what actually happens. For example, if I create a module like this:<add name="SharewareModule" type="HowAspNetWorks.SharewareMessageModule" /> by default it will fire against ALL requests regardless of the runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests flag. Even if the value runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="false", the module is fired. Not quite expected. So what is the runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests really good for? It's essentially an override for managedHandler preCondition. If I declare my handler in web.config like this:<add name="SharewareModule" type="HowAspNetWorks.SharewareMessageModule" preCondition="managedHandler" /> and the runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="false" my module only fires against managed requests. If I switch the flag to true, now my module ends up handling all IIS requests that are passed through from IIS. The moral of the story here is that if you intend to only look at ASP.NET content, you should always set the preCondition="managedHandler" attribute to ensure that only managed requests are fired on this module. But even if you do this, realize that runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="true" can override this setting. runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests and Http Application Events Another place the runAllManagedModulesForAllRequest attribute affects is the Global Http Application object (typically in global.asax) and the Application_XXXX events that you can hook up there. So while the events there are dynamically hooked up to the application class, they basically behave as if they were set with the preCodition="managedHandler" configuration switch. The end result is that if you have runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="true" you'll see every Http request passed through the Application_XXXX events, and you only see ASP.NET requests with the flag set to "false". What's all that mean? Configuring an application to handle requests for both ASP.NET and other content requests can be tricky especially if you need to mix modules that might require both. Couple of things are important to remember. If your module doesn't need to look at every request, by all means set a preCondition="managedHandler" on it. This will at least allow it to respond to the runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="false" flag and then only process ASP.NET requests. Look really carefully to see whether you actually need runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="true" in your applications as set by the default new project templates in Visual Studio. Part of the reason, this is the default because it was required for the initial versions of IIS 7 and ASP.NET 2 in order to handle MVC extensionless URLs. However, if you are running IIS 7 or later and .NET 4.0 you can use the ExtensionlessUrlHandler instead to allow you MVC functionality without requiring runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="true": <handlers> <remove name="ExtensionlessUrlHandler-Integrated-4.0" /> <add name="ExtensionlessUrlHandler-Integrated-4.0" path="*." verb="GET,HEAD,POST,DEBUG,PUT,DELETE,PATCH,OPTIONS" type="System.Web.Handlers.TransferRequestHandler" preCondition="integratedMode,runtimeVersionv4.0" /> </handlers> Oddly this is the default for Visual Studio 2012 MVC template apps, so I'm not sure why the default template still adds runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="true" is - it should be enabled only if there's a specific need to access non ASP.NET requests. As a side note, it's interesting that when you access a static HTML resource, you can actually write into the Response object and get the output to show, which is trippy. I haven't looked closely to see how this works - whether ASP.NET just fires directly into the native output stream or whether the static requests are re-routed directly through the ASP.NET pipeline once a managed code module is detected. This doesn't work for all non ASP.NET resources - for example, I can't do the same with ASP classic requests, but it makes for an interesting demo when injecting HTML content into a static HTML page :-) Note that on the original Windows Server 2008 and Vista (IIS 7.0) you might need a HotFix in order for ExtensionLessUrlHandler to work properly for MVC projects. On my live server I needed it (about 6 months ago), but others have observed that the latest service updates have integrated this functionality and the hotfix is not required. On IIS 7.5 and later I've not needed any patches for things to just work. Plan for non-ASP.NET Requests It's important to remember that if you write a .NET Module to run on IIS 7, there's no way for you to prevent non-ASP.NET requests from hitting your module. So make sure you plan to support requests to extensionless URLs, to static resources like files. Luckily ASP.NET creates a full Request and full Response object for you for non ASP.NET content. So even for static files and even for ASP classic for example, you can look at Request.FilePath or Request.ContentType (in post handler pipeline events) to determine what content you are dealing with. As always with Module design make sure you check for the conditions in your code that make the module applicable and if a filter fails immediately exit - minimize the code that runs if your module doesn't need to process the request.© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in IIS7   ASP.NET   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • Happy New Year! Back to school :)

    - by Jim Wang
    A brand new year is upon us and it’s time to get cracking with WebMatrix again…and go back to school :).  Last year we ran a successful product walkthrough for WebMatrix Beta 2 with our students from around the world, gathering awesome feedback for the final version of WebMatrix which is coming soon!  I’d like to take this chance to thank all the students who participated in this effort…you have really helped make the final product much better than it would have been otherwise. In 2011, we’re looking, as always, at bigger and better things.  One of the ideas that has been floating around is the concept of a WebMatrix college course that you could take for actual credit.  Of course, this is going to require coordination with college educators, but we think we’re up to the challenge :) If your school is still using an antiquated language to teach their web development 101 course, and you’d like to switch to WebMatrix, we’d like to hear your voice – better yet if you have contacts from your school and would like to be one of the first to give the program a try!  Comment on this post or email wptsdrext at microsoft.com.  We look forward to partnering with you guys ^^.

    Read the article

  • Creating Multiple Queries for Running Objects

    - by edurdias
    Running Objects combines the power of LINQ with Metadata definition to let you leverage multiples perspectives of your queries of objects. By default, RO brings all the objects in natural order of insertion and including all the visible properties of your class. In this post, we will understand how the QueryAttribute class is structured and how to make use of it. The QueryAttribute class This class is the responsible to specify all the possible perspectives of a list of objects. In other words, is...(read more)

    Read the article

  • When to use PHP or ASP.NET? [closed]

    - by loyalpenguin
    I have worked extensively in developing web applications using PHP and ASP.NET, but one of the questions that I'm constantly asked by customers is whether to move forward with a php website or an asp.net website. So naturally the first thing that comes to mind is to answer the question like this: PHP is open-source and ASP.NET is from Microsoft. Usually after something like that is said the customer has a blank look on there face. Apparently the fact that one is open source and the other isn't doesn't really faze them. And for good reason, because when I first heard it, it really doesn't tell me much. I know from working with both that each have their + and - when it comes to developing websites. NOTE: THIS QUESTION IS NOT TO QUESTION WHICH IS BETTER TO DEVELOP WITH. THIS QUESTION IS INTENDED TO BE OBJECTIVE. My question is what are differences between ASP.NET and PHP as far as Features Security Extendability Frameworks Average Development Time And when one is generally used over the other for certain types of projects. I am trying to compile a list of facts to be able to compare with the customer what developement platform is better for there particular project. I have done a simple search on google and a ton of articles come up, but the problem is the majority are usually biased towards PHP or ASP.NET. Also if you can maybe provide examples from experience when one technology was more preferable than the other that would be awesome.

    Read the article

  • Lifecycle of an ASP.NET MVC 5 Application

    Here you can download a PDF Document that charts the lifecycle of every ASP.NET MVC 5 application, from receiving the HTTP request to sending the HTTP response back to the client. It is designed both as an educational tool for those who are new to ASP.NET MVC and also as a reference for those who need to drill into specific aspects of the application. The PDF document has the following features: Relevant HttpApplication stages to help you understand where MVC integrates into the ASP.NET application lifecycle. A high-level view of the MVC application lifecycle, where you can understand the major stages that every MVC application passes through in the request processing pipeline. A detail view that shows drills down into the details of the request processing pipeline. You can compare the high-level view and the detail view to see how the lifecycles details are collected into the various stages. Placement and purpose of all overridable methods on the Controller object in the request processing pipeline. You may or may not have the need to override any one method, but it is important for you to understand their role in the application lifecycle so that you can write code at the appropriate life cycle stage for the effect you intend. Blown-up diagrams showing how each of the filter types (authentication, authorization, action, and result) is invoked. Link to a useful article or blog from each point of interest in the detail view. span.fullpost {display:none;}

    Read the article

  • Invalid Html Response and JS Errors when you open your Application in Visual Studio 2013

    - by imran_ku07
     I was working on an application which uses Telerik controls. The application was working fine for a while. Suddenly, the application stopped working. I mean lot of my application pages becoming very very ugly. I found JavaScript errors on every Browser's console. When I check the page view-source, the generated HTML was messy and invalid. This was only happening with my local machine. If someone else on my network accesses my application pages, he will get the correct HTML and no JavaScript errors. My mind was blowing because the same page was generating invalid HTML(and JavaScript errors) when I access the page using a local browser but generate correct HTML(and no JavaScript errors) when someone else access my application page remotely. Then I realized that I the only change I made last was opening my application in Visual Studio 2013 RTM which I installed few days ago. I closed the Visual Studio 2013, everything work like a charm. Then I became100% sure that this is only happening due to new Visual Studio 2013 feature called Browser Link. I just open the application again and add this in web.config. Everything become fine Happy coding :)   <add key="vs:EnableBrowserLink" value="false" />

    Read the article

  • Setting up ASP.NET structure for code

    - by user1175327
    I've always coded in C# MVC3 when developing web applications. But now i wanted to learn a bit more about developing web sites with just ASP.NET. But now i'm wondering what a good setup for my code would be. For me, an MVC like pattern seems to be a good way to go. But obviously ASP.NET doesn't have any router and controller classes. So i guess people have a different way of setting up their code when they do ASP.NET. So i'm looking for more information on how to get started with this. So not really the basics of ASP.NET, but something that focuses on a good code setup. Any good tutorials/information about this/?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET book for desktop programmer. [closed]

    - by RealityDysfunction
    Fellow programmers, I have been learning C# for a while now, but my ultimate goal is to develop ASP.NET applications. A few ASP.NET books I looked at either start with absolute basics...What is C#? What is a function...or Assume that I have developed web apps in other languages like PHP...I am looking for a book that is tailored for people who already know desktop programming but wish to learn ASP.NET. Did anybody come across such a book? Many Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Http handler for classic ASP application for introducing a layer between client and server

    - by JPReddy
    I've a huge classic ASP application where in thousands of users manage their company/business data. Currently this is not multi-user so that application users can create users and authorize them to access certain areas in the system. I'm thinking of writing a handler which will act as middle man between client and server and go through every request and find out who the user is and whether he is authorized to access the data he is trying to. For the moment ignore about the part how I'm going to check the authorization and all that stuff. Just want to know whether I can implement a ASP.net handler and use it as middle man for the requests coming for a asp website? I just want to read the url and see what is the page user is trying to access and what are the parameters he is passing in the url the posted data. Is this possible? I read that Asp.net handler cannot be used with asp website and I need to use isapi filter or extensions for that and that can be developed only c/c++. Can anybody through some light on this and guide me whether I'm in the right direction or not?

    Read the article

  • Using IIS Application Request Routing (ARR) for ASP.NET MVC

    - by Malcolm Frexner
    I use a simple ASP.NET MVC web (the template you use when you create a new site) and the web works as expected in my live environment. I now try to use IIS Application Request Routing version 2. I have a rule that send all reuqests to a different server that match a rule. The settings are a bit like this: http://blogs.iis.net/wonyoo/archive/2008/07/09/application-request-routing-arr-as-a-reverse-proxy.aspx My rule is just a bit different it is /shop(.*). Only requests that contain shop are send to a different server. I have to use rewrite, not redirect (The same as in the Picture) This works as long as the web the original requests go to is no ASP.NET MVC web. I tried to use a plain htm file in the webfolder and it worked. If put a compiled ASP.NET application into the webfolder it worked. But as soon as I put an ASP.NET MVC web into the folder, request arr served by this application. My understanding is that the ARR should kick in before the web application gets the chance to handle the request. Did anybody use ARR sucessfully as a reverse proxy for a ASP.NET MVC web? EDIT Here is the resulting web config when the rewrite roule is entered. With this rule I get a 404 that indicates that the rule is not used. <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <configuration> <configSections> <sectionGroup name="system.web.extensions" type="System.Web.Configuration.SystemWebExtensionsSectionGroup, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35"> <sectionGroup name="scripting" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingSectionGroup, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35"> <section name="scriptResourceHandler" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingScriptResourceHandlerSection, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" requirePermission="false" allowDefinition="MachineToApplication" /> <sectionGroup name="webServices" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingWebServicesSectionGroup, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35"> <section name="jsonSerialization" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingJsonSerializationSection, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" requirePermission="false" allowDefinition="Everywhere" /> <section name="profileService" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingProfileServiceSection, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" requirePermission="false" allowDefinition="MachineToApplication" /> <section name="authenticationService" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingAuthenticationServiceSection, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" requirePermission="false" allowDefinition="MachineToApplication" /> <section name="roleService" type="System.Web.Configuration.ScriptingRoleServiceSection, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" requirePermission="false" allowDefinition="MachineToApplication" /> </sectionGroup> </sectionGroup> </sectionGroup> </configSections> <appSettings /> <connectionStrings> <add name="ApplicationServices" connectionString="data source=.\SQLEXPRESS;Integrated Security=SSPI;AttachDBFilename=|DataDirectory|aspnetdb.mdf;User Instance=true" providerName="System.Data.SqlClient" /> </connectionStrings> <system.web> <!-- Set compilation debug="true" to insert debugging symbols into the compiled page. Because this affects performance, set this value to true only during development. --> <compilation debug="false"> <assemblies> <add assembly="System.Core, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=B77A5C561934E089" /> <add assembly="System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> <add assembly="System.Web.Abstractions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> <add assembly="System.Web.Routing, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> <add assembly="System.Web.Mvc, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> <add assembly="System.Data.DataSetExtensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=B77A5C561934E089" /> <add assembly="System.Xml.Linq, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=B77A5C561934E089" /> <add assembly="System.Data.Linq, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=B77A5C561934E089" /> </assemblies> </compilation> <!-- The <authentication> section enables configuration of the security authentication mode used by ASP.NET to identify an incoming user. --> <authentication mode="Forms"> <forms loginUrl="~/Account/LogOn" timeout="2880" /> </authentication> <membership> <providers> <clear /> <add name="AspNetSqlMembershipProvider" type="System.Web.Security.SqlMembershipProvider, System.Web, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a" connectionStringName="ApplicationServices" enablePasswordRetrieval="false" enablePasswordReset="true" requiresQuestionAndAnswer="false" requiresUniqueEmail="false" passwordFormat="Hashed" maxInvalidPasswordAttempts="5" minRequiredPasswordLength="6" minRequiredNonalphanumericCharacters="0" passwordAttemptWindow="10" passwordStrengthRegularExpression="" applicationName="/" /> </providers> </membership> <profile> <providers> <clear /> <add name="AspNetSqlProfileProvider" type="System.Web.Profile.SqlProfileProvider, System.Web, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a" connectionStringName="ApplicationServices" applicationName="/" /> </providers> </profile> <roleManager enabled="false"> <providers> <clear /> <add connectionStringName="ApplicationServices" applicationName="/" name="AspNetSqlRoleProvider" type="System.Web.Security.SqlRoleProvider, System.Web, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a" /> <add applicationName="/" name="AspNetWindowsTokenRoleProvider" type="System.Web.Security.WindowsTokenRoleProvider, System.Web, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a" /> </providers> </roleManager> <!-- The <customErrors> section enables configuration of what to do if/when an unhandled error occurs during the execution of a request. Specifically, it enables developers to configure html error pages to be displayed in place of a error stack trace. <customErrors mode="RemoteOnly" defaultRedirect="GenericErrorPage.htm"> <error statusCode="403" redirect="NoAccess.htm" /> <error statusCode="404" redirect="FileNotFound.htm" /> </customErrors> --> <pages> <controls> <add tagPrefix="asp" namespace="System.Web.UI" assembly="System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> <add tagPrefix="asp" namespace="System.Web.UI.WebControls" assembly="System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> </controls> <namespaces> <add namespace="System.Web.Mvc" /> <add namespace="System.Web.Mvc.Ajax" /> <add namespace="System.Web.Mvc.Html" /> <add namespace="System.Web.Routing" /> <add namespace="System.Linq" /> <add namespace="System.Collections.Generic" /> </namespaces> </pages> <httpHandlers> <remove verb="*" path="*.asmx" /> <add verb="*" path="*.asmx" validate="false" type="System.Web.Script.Services.ScriptHandlerFactory, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> <add verb="*" path="*_AppService.axd" validate="false" type="System.Web.Script.Services.ScriptHandlerFactory, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> <add verb="GET,HEAD" path="ScriptResource.axd" type="System.Web.Handlers.ScriptResourceHandler, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" validate="false" /> <add verb="*" path="*.mvc" validate="false" type="System.Web.Mvc.MvcHttpHandler, System.Web.Mvc, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> </httpHandlers> <httpModules> <add name="ScriptModule" type="System.Web.Handlers.ScriptModule, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> <add name="UrlRoutingModule" type="System.Web.Routing.UrlRoutingModule, System.Web.Routing, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> </httpModules> </system.web> <system.codedom> <compilers> <compiler language="c#;cs;csharp" extension=".cs" warningLevel="4" type="Microsoft.CSharp.CSharpCodeProvider, System, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"> <providerOption name="CompilerVersion" value="v3.5" /> <providerOption name="WarnAsError" value="false" /> </compiler> <compiler language="vb;vbs;visualbasic;vbscript" extension=".vb" warningLevel="4" type="Microsoft.VisualBasic.VBCodeProvider, System, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b77a5c561934e089"> <providerOption name="CompilerVersion" value="v3.5" /> <providerOption name="OptionInfer" value="true" /> <providerOption name="WarnAsError" value="false" /> </compiler> </compilers> </system.codedom> <system.web.extensions /> <!-- The system.webServer section is required for running ASP.NET AJAX under Internet Information Services 7.0. It is not necessary for previous version of IIS. --> <system.webServer> <rewrite> <rules> <rule name="shop" stopProcessing="true"> <match url="^shop/([_0-9a-z-.]+)" /> <action type="Rewrite" url="article.aspx?title={R:1}" logRewrittenUrl="true" /> </rule> </rules> </rewrite> <validation validateIntegratedModeConfiguration="false" /> <modules runAllManagedModulesForAllRequests="true"> <remove name="ScriptModule" /> <remove name="UrlRoutingModule" /> <add name="ScriptModule" preCondition="managedHandler" type="System.Web.Handlers.ScriptModule, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> <add name="UrlRoutingModule" type="System.Web.Routing.UrlRoutingModule, System.Web.Routing, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> </modules> <handlers> <remove name="WebServiceHandlerFactory-Integrated" /> <remove name="ScriptHandlerFactory" /> <remove name="ScriptHandlerFactoryAppServices" /> <remove name="ScriptResource" /> <remove name="MvcHttpHandler" /> <remove name="UrlRoutingHandler" /> <add name="ScriptHandlerFactory" verb="*" path="*.asmx" preCondition="integratedMode" type="System.Web.Script.Services.ScriptHandlerFactory, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> <add name="ScriptHandlerFactoryAppServices" verb="*" path="*_AppService.axd" preCondition="integratedMode" type="System.Web.Script.Services.ScriptHandlerFactory, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> <add name="ScriptResource" preCondition="integratedMode" verb="GET,HEAD" path="ScriptResource.axd" type="System.Web.Handlers.ScriptResourceHandler, System.Web.Extensions, Version=3.5.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> <add name="MvcHttpHandler" preCondition="integratedMode" verb="*" path="*.mvc" type="System.Web.Mvc.MvcHttpHandler, System.Web.Mvc, Version=1.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=31BF3856AD364E35" /> <add name="UrlRoutingHandler" preCondition="integratedMode" verb="*" path="UrlRouting.axd" type="System.Web.HttpForbiddenHandler, System.Web, Version=2.0.0.0, Culture=neutral, PublicKeyToken=b03f5f7f11d50a3a" /> </handlers> </system.webServer> </configuration>

    Read the article

  • Naming of ASP.NET controls inside User Controls with ASP.NET MVC

    - by skb
    I am wondering if there is a way to make ASP.NET controls play nicely with my ASP.NET MVC app. Here is what I am doing. I have an order page which displays info about a single Order object. The page will normally have a bunch of rows of data, each row representing an OrderItem object. Each row is an ASP.NET User Control. On the user control there is a form element with two text boxes (Quantity and Price), and an update button. When I click the update button, I expect the form to post the data for that individual OrderItem row to a controller method and update the OrderItem record in the database. Here is my problem: When the post happens, the framework complains because the fields on the form don't match the parameters on the controller method. Each form field is something like "OrderItem_1$Quantity" or "OrderItem_2$Price" instead of just "Quantity" or "Price" which would match my method parameters. I have been told that I can overcome this by making sure that the IDs of all my controls are unique for the page, but allow the NAMEs to be repeated between different forms, so that if a form for an individual row is posted, the name can be something that will match what is on my controller method. The only problem is that I am using ASP.NET controls for my text boxes (which I REALLY want to continue doing) and I can't find any way to override the name field. There is no Name propery on an ASP.NET control, and even when I try to set it using the Attributes accessor property by saying "control.Attributes["Name"] = "Price";" it just adds another name= attribute to the HTML tag which doesn't work. Does any one know how I can make this work? I really don't like all of the HtmlHelper functions like TextBox and DropDown because I hate having my .aspx be so PHP or ASP like with the <%% tags and everything. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Mvc2 validation summary and required metadata

    - by Arnis L.
    source code... Thing is, if i specify required metadata using fluent modelmetadata provider like this= public class Foo { public string Bar { get; set; } } public class FooModelMetadataConfiguration : ModelMetadataConfiguration<Foo> { public FooModelMetadataConfiguration() { Configure(x => x.Bar) .Required("lapsa") ; } } And write this into my view = <% Html.BeginForm(); %> <%= Html.ValidationSummary() %> <%= Html.TextBoxFor(x=>x.Bar) %> <% Html.EndForm(); %> And add this to home controller = [HttpPost] public ActionResult Index(Foo foo) { ViewData["Message"] = "Welcome to ASP.NET MVC!"; return View(foo); } It will output this html = <div class="validation-summary-errors"> <ul> <li>lapsa</li> <li>The Bar field is required.</li> </ul> </div> I can't understand why 2nd error is rendered and how to omit it. Author of System.Web.Mvc.Extensibility framework replied with = I think this is a known issue of asp.net mvc, i could not remember the exact location where I have read it, I suggest you post the issue in asp.net mvc issue tracker over codeplex. But before i post anything on issue tracker - i would like to understand first what exactly is wrong. Any help with that?

    Read the article

  • How to change id value when using Html.DropDownListFor helper in asp.net mvc 2.0?

    - by chobo2
    Hi I have a partial view that has something like this <%= Html.DropDownListFor(m => m.SelectedProductName, Model.ProductList, "Select a Product") %> Now you can create a new product and edit a existing product. Both editing and creating use the same form. The create is on the main page on load up. Edit popus up in a jquery u.i model dialog and renders a new partial view. So as far as the page is concerned is that I have 2 dropdown boxes with the same "id" which is bad since they should be unique. So how do I change the id? So when the edit loads it might have a id of "editSelectedProductName"? I tried to do this in the view model public string SelectedProductName{ get; set; } ViewModelConstructor() { SelectedProductName = "EditSelectedProductName"; } But it seems to not care and keeps using "SelectedProductName" as the product name. Thanks

    Read the article

  • Comparing ASP.Net Framework to Cakephp, Zend , Ruby on Rails

    - by numerical25
    I am a PHP developer migrating to C# ASP.Net Framework. As of right now, I am experienced in using Php for developing sites and I use CakePhp and Zend framework as my RAD tools to help me produce better applications. As I move over to ASP.NET, I have this view that C# ASP.Net framework itself is already a RAD tool and is equivalent to using Cakephp, Zend, or even Ruby on Rails. So I really shouldn't have no concerns trying to find a separate library for ASP.NET that will help me produce better applications. To me, in a sense the ASP.NET is already like a MVC cause it seperates the model from the view and the methods are almost like controllers. So as far as having the best tools are concerned, should I be satisfied with just using ASP.NET as my RAD tool.

    Read the article

  • ASP.Net Error - Unable to cast object of type 'System.String' to type 'System.Data.DataTable'.

    - by xtrabits
    I get the below error Unable to cast object of type 'System.String' to type 'System.Data.DataTable'. This is the code I'm using Dim str As String = String.Empty If (Session("Brief") IsNot Nothing) Then Dim dt As DataTable = Session("Brief") If (dt.Rows.Count > 0) Then For Each dr As DataRow In dt.Rows If (str.Length > 0) Then str += "," str += dr("talentID").ToString() Next End If End If Return str Thanks

    Read the article

  • Does Security Trimming work with Web Forms Routing?

    - by Slauma
    In my web.config I have configured a SiteMapProvider with securityTrimmingEnabled="true" and on my main master page is an asp:Menu control bound to an asp:SiteMapDataSource. In addition I have configured restricted access to all pages in a subfolder "Admin" (using another web.config in this subfolder). If I put a sitemapNode in Web.sitemap... <siteMapNode url="~/Admin/Default.aspx" title="Administration" description="" > ... only users in role "Admin" will have the menu item related to that siteMapNode. So this is working fine and as intended. Now I have defined a URL route in Global.asax to map the physical file to a new URL: System.Web.Routing.RouteTable.Routes.MapPageRoute("AdminHomeRoute", "Administration/Home", "~/Admin/Default.aspx"); But when I use this route-URL in the SiteMap file... <siteMapNode url="Administration/Home" title="Administration" description="" > ... it seems that security trimming does not work: The menu item is visible for all users. (Access to the page is still restricted though, so selecting the menu item by non-Admin users does not navigate to the restricted page.) Question: Is there any setting I've missed so far to make security trimming working with URL routing in ASP.NET 4.0 Web Forms? Did I do something wrong? Is there any work-around? Thank you for help!

    Read the article

  • in asp.net linking two webpages and one of them has emails which an user can select who they want to

    - by user305112
    I have two pages in the first page i have a button called emails. when the user clicks on the email button it will take them to the emails pages and there i have 12 checkboxes and a OK button. the user can select as many checkboxes as they want. the checkboxes have peoples email in them. after they select it they click on the OK button and which will take them to the page1.aspx where they will fill rest of the information out and when they clicked on the emails button and came back to the page1 it will not erase any of their information. I have redirected the page to emails and back to page1 but i don't know how to save the checked emails from the emails page and clicking OK and taking back to the page1 so the other information on that page is already there not been erased.

    Read the article

  • How to create a new WCF/MVC/jQuery application from scratch

    - by pjohnson
    As a corporate developer by trade, I don't get much opportunity to create from-the-ground-up web sites; usually it's tweaks, fixes, and new functionality to existing sites. And with hobby sites, I often don't find the challenges I run into with enterprise systems; usually it's starting from Visual Studio's boilerplate project and adding whatever functionality I want to play around with, rarely deploying outside my own machine. So my experience creating a new enterprise-level site was a bit dated, and the technologies to do so have come a long way, and are much more ready to go out of the box. My intention with this post isn't so much to provide any groundbreaking insights, but to just tie together a lot of information in one place to make it easy to create a new site from scratch. Architecture One site I created earlier this year had an MVC 3 front end and a WCF 4-driven service layer. Using Visual Studio 2010, these project types are easy enough to add to a new solution. I created a third Class Library project to store common functionality the front end and services layers both needed to access, for example, the DataContract classes that the front end uses to call services in the service layer. By keeping DataContract classes in a separate project, I avoided the need for the front end to have an assembly/project reference directly to the services code, a bit cleaner and more flexible of an SOA implementation. Consuming the service Even by this point, VS has given you a lot. You have a working web site and a working service, neither of which do much but are great starting points. To wire up the front end and the services, I needed to create proxy classes and WCF client configuration information. I decided to use the SvcUtil.exe utility provided as part of the Windows SDK, which you should have installed if you installed VS. VS also provides an Add Service Reference command since the .NET 1.x ASMX days, which I've never really liked; it creates several .cs/.disco/etc. files, some of which contained hardcoded URL's, adding duplicate files (*1.cs, *2.cs, etc.) without doing a good job of cleaning up after itself. I've found SvcUtil much cleaner, as it outputs one C# file (containing several proxy classes) and a config file with settings, and it's easier to use to regenerate the proxy classes when the service changes, and to then maintain all your configuration in one place (your Web.config, instead of the Service Reference files). I provided it a reference to a copy of my common assembly so it doesn't try to recreate the data contract classes, had it use the type List<T> for collections, and modified the output files' names and .NET namespace, ending up with a command like: svcutil.exe /l:cs /o:MyService.cs /config:MyService.config /r:MySite.Common.dll /ct:System.Collections.Generic.List`1 /n:*,MySite.Web.ServiceProxies http://localhost:59999/MyService.svc I took the generated MyService.cs file and drop it in the web project, under a ServiceProxies folder, matching the namespace and keeping it separate from classes I coded manually. Integrating the config file took a little more work, but only needed to be done once as these settings didn't often change. A great thing Microsoft improved with WCF 4 is configuration; namely, you can use all the default settings and not have to specify them explicitly in your config file. Unfortunately, SvcUtil doesn't generate its config file this way. If you just copy & paste MyService.config's contents into your front end's Web.config, you'll copy a lot of settings you don't need, plus this will get unwieldy if you add more services in the future, each with its own custom binding. Really, as the only mandatory settings are the endpoint's ABC's (address, binding, and contract) you can get away with just this: <system.serviceModel>  <client>    <endpoint address="http://localhost:59999/MyService.svc" binding="wsHttpBinding" contract="MySite.Web.ServiceProxies.IMyService" />  </client></system.serviceModel> By default, the services project uses basicHttpBinding. As you can see, I switched it to wsHttpBinding, a more modern standard. Using something like netTcpBinding would probably be faster and more efficient since the client & service are both written in .NET, but it requires additional server setup and open ports, whereas switching to wsHttpBinding is much simpler. From an MVC controller action method, I instantiated the client, and invoked the method for my operation. As with any object that implements IDisposable, I wrapped it in C#'s using() statement, a tidy construct that ensures Dispose gets called no matter what, even if an exception occurs. Unfortunately there are problems with that, as WCF's ClientBase<TChannel> class doesn't implement Dispose according to Microsoft's own usage guidelines. I took an approach similar to Technology Toolbox's fix, except using partial classes instead of a wrapper class to extend the SvcUtil-generated proxy, making the fix more seamless from the controller's perspective, and theoretically, less code I have to change if and when Microsoft fixes this behavior. User interface The MVC 3 project template includes jQuery and some other common JavaScript libraries by default. I updated the ones I used to the latest versions using NuGet, available in VS via the Tools > Library Package Manager > Manage NuGet Packages for Solution... > Updates. I also used this dialog to remove packages I wasn't using. Given that it's smart enough to know the difference between the .js and .min.js files, I was hoping it would be smart enough to know which to include during build and publish operations, but this doesn't seem to be the case. I ended up using Cassette to perform the minification and bundling of my JavaScript and CSS files; ASP.NET 4.5 includes this functionality out of the box. The web client to web server link via jQuery was easy enough. In my JavaScript function, unobtrusively wired up to a button's click event, I called $.ajax, corresponding to an action method that returns a JsonResult, accomplished by passing my model class to the Controller.Json() method, which jQuery helpfully translates from JSON to a JavaScript object.$.ajax calls weren't perfectly straightforward. I tried using the simpler $.post method instead, but ran into trouble without specifying the contentType parameter, which $.post doesn't have. The url parameter is simple enough, though for flexibility in how the site is deployed, I used MVC's Url.Action method to get the URL, then sent this to JavaScript in a JavaScript string variable. If the request needed input data, I used the JSON.stringify function to convert a JavaScript object with the parameters into a JSON string, which MVC then parses into strongly-typed C# parameters. I also specified "json" for dataType, and "application/json; charset=utf-8" for contentType. For success and error, I provided my success and error handling functions, though success is a bit hairier. "Success" in this context indicates whether the HTTP request succeeds, not whether what you wanted the AJAX call to do on the web server was successful. For example, if you make an AJAX call to retrieve a piece of data, the success handler will be invoked for any 200 OK response, and the error handler will be invoked for failed requests, e.g. a 404 Not Found (if the server rejected the URL you provided in the url parameter) or 500 Internal Server Error (e.g. if your C# code threw an exception that wasn't caught). If an exception was caught and handled, or if the data requested wasn't found, this would likely go through the success handler, which would need to do further examination to verify it did in fact get back the data for which it asked. I discuss this more in the next section. Logging and exception handling At this point, I had a working application. If I ran into any errors or unexpected behavior, debugging was easy enough, but of course that's not an option on public web servers. Microsoft Enterprise Library 5.0 filled this gap nicely, with its Logging and Exception Handling functionality. First I installed Enterprise Library; NuGet as outlined above is probably the best way to do so. I needed a total of three assembly references--Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling, Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.Logging, and Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging. VS links with the handy Enterprise Library 5.0 Configuration Console, accessible by right-clicking your Web.config and choosing Edit Enterprise Library V5 Configuration. In this console, under Logging Settings, I set up a Rolling Flat File Trace Listener to write to log files but not let them get too large, using a Text Formatter with a simpler template than that provided by default. Logging to a different (or additional) destination is easy enough, but a flat file suited my needs. At this point, I verified it wrote as expected by calling the Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.Logging.Logger.Write method from my C# code. With those settings verified, I went on to wire up Exception Handling with Logging. Back in the EntLib Configuration Console, under Exception Handling, I used a LoggingExceptionHandler, setting its Logging Category to the category I already had configured in the Logging Settings. Then, from code (e.g. a controller's OnException method, or any action method's catch block), I called the Microsoft.Practices.EnterpriseLibrary.ExceptionHandling.ExceptionPolicy.HandleException method, providing the exception and the exception policy name I had configured in the Exception Handling Settings. Before I got this configured correctly, when I tried it out, nothing was logged. In working with .NET, I'm used to seeing an exception if something doesn't work or isn't set up correctly, but instead working with these EntLib modules reminds me more of JavaScript (before the "use strict" v5 days)--it just does nothing and leaves you to figure out why, I presume due in part to the listener pattern Microsoft followed with the Enterprise Library. First, I verified logging worked on its own. Then, verifying/correcting where each piece wires up to the next resolved my problem. Your C# code calls into the Exception Handling module, referencing the policy you pass the HandleException method; that policy's configuration contains a LoggingExceptionHandler that references a logCategory; that logCategory should be added in the loggingConfiguration's categorySources section; that category references a listener; that listener should be added in the loggingConfiguration's listeners section, which specifies the name of the log file. One final note on error handling, as the proper way to handle WCF and MVC errors is a whole other very lengthy discussion. For AJAX calls to MVC action methods, depending on your configuration, an exception thrown here will result in ASP.NET'S Yellow Screen Of Death being sent back as a response, which is at best unnecessarily and uselessly verbose, and at worst a security risk as the internals of your application are exposed to potential hackers. I mitigated this by overriding my controller's OnException method, passing the exception off to the Exception Handling module as above. I created an ErrorModel class with as few properties as possible (e.g. an Error string), sending as little information to the client as possible, to both maximize bandwidth and mitigate risk. I then return an ErrorModel in JSON format for AJAX requests: if (filterContext.HttpContext.Request.IsAjaxRequest()){    filterContext.Result = Json(new ErrorModel(...));    filterContext.ExceptionHandled = true;} My $.ajax calls from the browser get a valid 200 OK response and go into the success handler. Before assuming everything is OK, I check if it's an ErrorModel or a model containing what I requested. If it's an ErrorModel, or null, I pass it to my error handler. If the client needs to handle different errors differently, ErrorModel can contain a flag, error code, string, etc. to differentiate, but again, sending as little information back as possible is ideal. Summary As any experienced ASP.NET developer knows, this is a far cry from where ASP.NET started when I began working with it 11 years ago. WCF services are far more powerful than ASMX ones, MVC is in many ways cleaner and certainly more unit test-friendly than Web Forms (if you don't consider the code/markup commingling you're doing again), the Enterprise Library makes error handling and logging almost entirely configuration-driven, AJAX makes a responsive UI more feasible, and jQuery makes JavaScript coding much less painful. It doesn't take much work to get a functional, maintainable, flexible application, though having it actually do something useful is a whole other matter.

    Read the article

  • Resons why I'm using php rather then asp.net [closed]

    - by spirytus
    I have basic idea of how asp .Net works, but finds all framework hard to use if you are a newbie. I found compiling, web applications vs websites and all that stuff you should know to program in asp .net a bit tedious and so personally I go with php to create small, to medium applications for my clients. There are couple of reasons for it: php is easy scripting language, top to bottom and you done. You still can create objects, classes and if you have idea of MVC its fairly easy to create basic structure yourself so you can keep you presentation layer "relatively" clean. Although I find myself still mixing basic logic in my view's, I am trying to stick to booleans, and for each loops. ASP .net keeps it cleaner as far as I know and I agree that this is great. Heaps of free stuff for php and lots of help everywhere Although choice of IDE's for php is very limited, I still don't have to be stuck with VisualStudio. Lets be honest.. you can program in whatever you like but does anyone uses anything else other than VS? For basic applications I create, Visual Studio doesn't come even close to notepad :) / phpEdit (or similar) combination. It lacks of many features I constantly use, although armies of developers are using it and it must be for good reason. Personally not a big fan of VS though. Being on the market for that long should make editing much easier. I know .Net comes with awesome set of controls, validators etc. which is truly awesome. For me the problem starts if I want my validator to behave slightly different way and lets say fade in/out error messages. I know its possible to extend it behavior, plug into lifecycle and output different JS to the client and so on. I just never see it happen in places I work, and honestly, I don't even think most of .net developers I worked with during last couple of years would know how to do that. In php I have to grab some plugin for jQuery and use it for validation, which is fairly easy task once you had done it before. Again I'm sure its easy for .net gurus, but for newbie like me its almost impossible. I found that many asp .net programmers are very limited in what they are able to do and basically whack together .net applications using same lame set of controls, not even bothering in looking into how it works and what if? Now I don't want to anger anyone :) I know there is huge number of excellent .Net developers who know their stuff and are able to extend controls and do all that magic in no time. I found it a bit annoying though that many of them stick to what is provided without even trying to make it better. Nothing against .net here, just a thought really :) I remember when asp.net came out the idea was that front-end people will not be able to screw anything up and do their fron-end stuff without worrying what happens behind. Now its never that easy and I always tend to get server side people to fix this and that during development. Things like ID's assigned to controls can very easily make your application break and if someone is pure HTML guy using VS its easy to break something. Thats my thoughs on php and .net and reasons why for my work I go with php. I know that once learned asp .net is awesome technology and summing all up php doesn't even come close to it. For someone like me however, individually developing small basic applications for clients, php seems to work much better. Please let me know your thoughts on the above :)

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52  | Next Page >