Search Results

Search found 59535 results on 2382 pages for 'asp net mvc series'.

Page 46/2382 | < Previous Page | 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53  | Next Page >

  • Back from Russia

    - by Stephen Walther
    Thanks everyone who came to my talks on ASP.NET Web Forms and MVC in Moscow last week!  Here are the slide decks and demo code for the two talks (You need Visual Studio 2010):   What’s New in ASP.NET MVC 2?   What’s New in ASP.NET 4 Web Forms?   I had a great time in Russia. On the second day, I had an opportunity to walk around Moscow. Here’s a picture of me standing in Red Square:   Here’s a picture of me eating Chicken Kiev with Microsoft evangelist James Senior. James has just started his worldwide Web Camp tour to promote ASP.NET 4. He is traveling non-stop country to country. After Russia, he is off to China and Australia. You can find out more about the Web Camps here: http://www.webcamps.ms/

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET 4.0- CompressionEnabled Property in session state 4.0

    - by Jalpesh P. Vadgama
    Hello Guys, This blog has been quite for few days. Because i was busy with some personal and professional work both and that’s why i am not able to work on writing blog posts which i have discovered in last few days. Here is one features of asp.net 4.0 that I am going to explain. As a web developer we all know about session. Without the use of session any database driven web application is incomplete. As we all know unlike windows form web forms are state less so when user interacts with web application we need to maintain state amongst web pages and we are using session for maintaining state between web pages for each users. ASP.NET is also provide same kind of session state functionalities. ASP.Net Session state identify request coming for same user and same browser for specific session time out interval and its preserves values in session for that specific time intervals and that’s help us in maintaining state amongst web pages for a specific user. ASP.NET Session state allows us to store session in three way 1. IncProc 2. Session State Service 3. SQL Server. In SQL Server mode it will store session in SQL Server tables instead of storing it in Server Memory. ASP.NET 4.0 provides a new property called Compression Enabled that means when we store values in serialized form in SQL Server with GZip Compression and that results in better performance. For that you need to store property in web.config like following. <sessionState allowCustomSqlDatabase="true" sqlConnectionString="data source=Server;Initial Catalog=aspnetsessionstatedb" compressionEnabled="true" /> That’s it now with the use of this property you can have better performance when you are storing large amount of data in session.But still you need to decide that why you want to stored large amount of data in session because its against best practices. Technorati Tags: Session,ASP.NET 4.0

    Read the article

  • Entity Framework Code First: Get Entities From Local Cache or the Database

    - by Ricardo Peres
    Entity Framework Code First makes it very easy to access local (first level) cache: you just access the DbSet<T>.Local property. This way, no query is sent to the database, only performed in already loaded entities. If you want to first search local cache, then the database, if no entries are found, you can use this extension method: 1: public static class DbContextExtensions 2: { 3: public static IQueryable<T> LocalOrDatabase<T>(this DbContext context, Expression<Func<T, Boolean>> expression) where T : class 4: { 5: IEnumerable<T> localResults = context.Set<T>().Local.Where(expression.Compile()); 6:  7: if (localResults.Any() == true) 8: { 9: return (localResults.AsQueryable()); 10: } 11:  12: IQueryable<T> databaseResults = context.Set<T>().Where(expression); 13:  14: return (databaseResults); 15: } 16: }

    Read the article

  • Vote of Disconfidence to Entity Framework

    - by Ricardo Peres
    A friend of mine has found the following problem with Entity Framework 4: Two simple classes and one association between them (one to many): One condition to filter out soft-deleted entities (WHERE Deleted = 0): 100 records in the database; A simple query: 1: var l = ctx.Person.Include("Address").Where(x => (x.Address.Name == "317 Oak Blvd." && x.Address.Number == 926) || (x.Address.Name == "891 White Milton Drive" && x.Address.Number == 497)); Will produce the following SQL: 1: SELECT 2: [Extent1].[Id] AS [Id], 3: [Extent1].[FullName] AS [FullName], 4: [Extent1].[AddressId] AS [AddressId], 5: [Extent202].[Id] AS [Id1], 6: [Extent202].[Name] AS [Name], 7: [Extent202].[Number] AS [Number] 8: FROM [dbo].[Person] AS [Extent1] 9: LEFT OUTER JOIN [dbo].[Address] AS [Extent2] ON ([Extent2].[Deleted] = 0) AND ([Extent1].[AddressId] = [Extent2].[Id]) 10: LEFT OUTER JOIN [dbo].[Address] AS [Extent3] ON ([Extent3].[Deleted] = 0) AND ([Extent1].[AddressId] = [Extent3].[Id]) 11: LEFT OUTER JOIN [dbo].[Address] AS [Extent4] ON ([Extent4].[Deleted] = 0) AND ([Extent1].[AddressId] = [Extent4].[Id]) 12: LEFT OUTER JOIN [dbo].[Address] AS [Extent5] ON ([Extent5].[Deleted] = 0) AND ([Extent1].[AddressId] = [Extent5].[Id]) 13: LEFT OUTER JOIN [dbo].[Address] AS [Extent6] ON ([Extent6].[Deleted] = 0) AND ([Extent1].[AddressId] = [Extent6].[Id]) 14: ... 15: WHERE ((N'317 Oak Blvd.' = [Extent2].[Name]) AND (926 = [Extent3].[Number])) 16: ... And will result in 680 MB of memory being taken! Now, Entity Framework has been historically known for producing less than optimal SQL, but 680 MB for 100 entities?! According to Microsoft, the problem will be addressed in the following version, there is a Connect issue open. There is even a whitepaper, Performance Considerations for Entity Framework 5, which talks about some of the changes and optimizations coming on version 5, but by reading it, I got even more concerned: “Once the cache contains a set number of entries (800), we start a timer that periodically (once-per-minute) sweeps the cache.” Say what?! The next version of Entity Framework will spawn timer threads?! When Code First came along, I thought it was a step in the right direction. Sure, it didn’t include some things that NHibernate did for quite some time – for example, different strategies for Id generation that do not rely on IDENTITY columns, which makes INSERT batching impossible, or support for enumerated types – but I thought these would come with the time. Now, enumerated types have, but so did… timer threads! I’m afraid Entity Framework is becoming a monster.

    Read the article

  • HtmlHelperExtensions are not visible in view mvc3 asp.net

    - by user1299372
    I've added a class for the HTML Custom Extensions: using System; using System.Linq.Expressions; using System.Text; using System.Web.Mvc; using System.Web.Mvc.Html; namespace App.MvcHtmlHelpers { public static class HtmlHelperExtensions { public static MvcHtmlString ComboBox(HtmlHelper html, string name, SelectList items, string selectedValue) { var sb = new StringBuilder(); sb.Append(html.DropDownList(name + "_hidden", items, new { @style = "width: 200px;", @onchange = "$('input#" + name + "').val($(this).val());" })); sb.Append(html.TextBox(name, selectedValue, new { @style = "margin-left: -199px; width: 179px; height: 1.2em; border: 0;" })); return MvcHtmlString.Create(sb.ToString()); } public static MvcHtmlString ComboBoxFor<TModel, TProperty>(HtmlHelper<TModel> html, Expression<Func<TModel, TProperty>> expression, SelectList items) { var me = (MemberExpression)expression.Body; var name = me.Member.Name; var sb = new StringBuilder(); sb.Append(html.DropDownList(name + "_hidden", items, new { @style = "width: 200px;", @onchange = "$('input#" + name + "').val($(this).val());" })); sb.Append(html.TextBoxFor(expression, new { @style = "margin-left: -199px; width: 179px; height: 1.2em; border: 0;" })); return MvcHtmlString.Create(sb.ToString()); } I've also registered it in my site web config: <namespaces> <add namespace="System.Web.Helpers" /> <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.Web.WebPages" /> <add namespace="App.MvcHtmlHelpers"/> </namespaces> In my view, I import the namespace: <%@ Import Namespace="RSPWebApp.MvcHtmlHelpers" %> But when I go to call it in the view, it doesn't recognize the custom extension. Can someone help me by telling me what I might have missed? Thanks so much in advance! <%:Html.ComboBoxFor(a => a.Street2, streetAddressListItems) %

    Read the article

  • calling wcf from asp.net mvc - authorization error

    - by niao
    Greetings, My asp.net mvc application calls WCF service. Everything is ok on my localhost (WinXP, IIS6). When I moved on production server where Win2008 Server and IIS7 are used my application gets authorization error while connecting to WCF service. ASP.NET MVC works ok but when it calls some methods on my WCF Service an error is thrown. The funny thing is that when I calls the same WCF Production service from the same ASP.NET MVC application hosted on my localhost it works ok. Can someone please help me with this. I think it's authorization problem which can be fixed on IIS7. Am I right?

    Read the article

  • Dealing with XML in ASP.NET MVC

    - by Matt W
    I have a block of XML in a database which is easy enough to pull out using ASP.NET MVC, however I would like to access and modify the XML in an way more consistent with class instances. Is there a way to get the MVC (or any other model) to generate a data access (or perhaps Entity) class set from the DB-stored XML? If the above is rather obtuse, the question could be summarised as; What method would you use to best access and modify XML stored in a database from an ASP.NET MVC application? Thanks, Matt.

    Read the article

  • ASP.Net MVC 2 Error Method not found: 'System .string

    - by Saravanan I M
    I converted my website from asp.net mvc 1.0 to 2.0. After converting that i am getting the following error in actionlink Method not found: 'System.String System.Web.Mvc.Html.LinkExtensions.RouteLink(System.Web.Mvc.HtmlHelper, System.String, System.Web.Routing.RouteValueDictionary, System.Collections.Generic.IDictionary`2<System.String,System.Object>)'. Line 102: <%var Signin = Html.Resource("globalResources, Signin"); %> Line 103: <% if (string.IsNullOrEmpty(Signin)) Signin = "Signin"; %> Line 104: <%= Html.ActionLink<AccountController>(cntrl => cntrl.LogOn(), Signin.ToString(), new { @class = "defaultmaster" })%> Line 105: | Line 106: <%var register = Html.Resource("globalResources, Register"); %> Source File: e:\Muchsocial\Sourcecode\Muchsocial\Views\Shared\Muchsocial.Master Line: 104

    Read the article

  • Is POSTing a Dictionary to an .NET MVC action possible?

    - by Brenton Alker
    I have a form which contains a series of fields like: <input type="text" name="User[123]" value="Alice" /> <input type="text" name="User[456]" value="Bob" /> ... Where the index of the User array (123 and 456) are ID's associated with the value. I'm trying to update these values in the controller. My thinking is that a Dictionary that maps ID to name would work, but creating the action like: public void Save(Dictionary<string, string> user) { // ... } results in the user parameter being null. So, is passing a Dictionary possible? or, is there another method to achieve this?

    Read the article

  • How can I perform a normal postback on an ASP.NET page with AJAX history enabled?

    - by Nick
    I have an ASP.NET 3.5 page with an update panel and history enabled. It works fine when I perform async postbacks but I get problems when I want to perform a normal postback. The page load happens fine for the normal postback but then I get asynchronous page loads from the script manager which load the ajax history in. If I could have the ajax history not loading for the times I want to perform a normal postback then everything would be fine. Is there anyway to do this?

    Read the article

  • Best way to manage connection strings in a project containing both Classic ASP and ASP.Net 1.1 code?

    - by JamesEggers
    I have a project that I have inherited that is primarily a Classic ASP application; however, intermixed in the the application are a handful of ASP.net pages. Some of the ASP.net pages are 1.1 and do not use a code behind model. The classic ASP pages have a number of /include directories where there's a file for database connections. The ASP.Net pages have the connection string hard coded in in their code. I'm trying to clean up this mess of connection strings so it's easier to manage across development environments. Does anyone have any recommendations on how I may be able to effectively do this that will work for both Classic ASP and ASP.Net pages? Thanks

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC thinks my virtual directory is a controller

    - by kmehta
    I have a virtual directory under my MVC website in IIS called "Files". This directory is at the same level as my Views directory. When I link to a file from my MVC app to a file under my Files directory, I get the following error: The controller for path '/Files/Images/1c7f7eb8-5d66-4bca-a73a-4ba6340a7805.JPG' was not found or does not implement IController. It thinks that my Files VD is a controller. How do I access my files like a normal VD without MVC interfering? Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How to make .NET WebForm Routing work with Authorization

    - by jakmas
    I have routes that are being registered from the database into an asp.net website (non MVC). The routes register fine, they all work when I am logged in. What I am trying to do is create a landing page based on some route data: Page is [site]/landing/dell The route looks like: "landing/{client}" and it routes to my page Login.aspx, in there I get the client out of the route, then display some custom brand data based on the value. In my web.config, I have my authentication mode set to forms, with my loginUrl = "Login.aspx" When the user does not have the authorization cookie, it redirects the user to: [site]/Login.aspx?ReturnUrl=%2flanding%2fdell instead of keeping the route url, and displaying the correct data. The IIS server actually does not even process the route at all, just sends the user to the Login.aspx page. I have tried several additions to my web.config: etc, and many variations, but nothing seems to work. Ideas anyone? I assume this is a common issue, and it is just not well documented.

    Read the article

  • Where would async calls make sense in an ASP.net (MVC) Web Application?

    - by Michael Stum
    I'm just wondering, if I have an ASP.net Web Application, either WebForms or MVC, is there any situation where doing stuff asynchronously would make sense? The Web Server already handles threading for me in that it spins up multiple threads to handle requests, and most request processing is rather simple and straight forward. I see some use for when stuff truly is a) expensive and b) can be parallelized. but these are the minority cases (at least from what I've encountered). Is there any gain from async in the simple "Read some input, do some CRUD, display some output" scenario?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET - DropDown DataBinding (Rebind?)

    - by Bob Fincheimer
    I have a drop down which has a method which binds data to it: dropDown.Items.Clear() dropDown.AppendDataBoundItems = True Select Case selType Case SelectionTypes.Empty dropDown.Items.Insert(0, New ListItem("", "")) Case SelectionTypes.Any dropDown.Items.Insert(0, New ListItem("ANY", "")) Case SelectionTypes.Select dropDown.Items.Insert(0, New ListItem("Select One", "")) End Select BindDropDown(val) The BindDropDown method simply sets the datasource, datakeyname, datavaluename, and then databinds the data. For a reason which I cannot avoid, I MUST call this method twice sometimes. When it is called twice, All of the databound items show up two times, but the top item (the one I manually insert) is there only once. Is ASP doing something wierd when i databind twice even though i clear the list between? Or does it have to do something with the viewstate/controlstate? EDIT__ The entire page, and this control has EnableViewState="false" EDIT___ The dropdown is inside a form view. After the selected value is set I have to rebind the dropdown just in case the selected value is not there [because it is an inactive user]. After this, the formview duplicates the databound items.

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC 2 controller-url problems

    - by cc0
    I am still very new to the MVC framework, but I managed to create a controller that reads from a database and writes JSON to an url; host.com/Controllername?minValue=something&maxValue=something However when I move the site to a subfolder; host.com/mvc/ it doesn't seem to be able to call the controller from there when I do it like this; host.com/mvc/Controllername?minValue=something&maxValue=something Did I forget to do something somewhere to make this url call valid from that subfolder? Any help here would be greatly appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Which data framework is better for an ASP.NET MVC site - LINQ to SQL or NHibernate

    - by Paul Alexander
    We're about to embark on some ASP.NET MVC development and have been using our own entity framework for years. However we need to support more than our entity framework is capable of and so I'd like to get some opinions about using MVC with a more robust framework. We have narrowed down or choices to either NHibernate (with the Fluent APIs) or LINQ to SQL. Which framework lends itself best to MVC style development (I know SO uses LINQ to SQL)? If we want to support SQL Server, Oracle, MySQL - does that exclude LINQ to SQL?

    Read the article

  • Html.LabelFor and Html.TextBoxFor generate empy html code

    - by Ceridan
    I'm writing my first ASP.NET MVC application and there is one big problem for me. I want to make a control which will represent a form, but when I try to generate labels and textboxes it returns to me empty page. So, this is my model file (MyModel.cs): namespace MyNamespace.Models { public class MyModel { [Required(ErrorMessage = "You have to fill this field")] [DisplayName("Input name")] public string Name{ get; set; } } } This is MyFormControlView.ascx file with my control: <%@ Control Language="C#" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewUserControl<MyNamespace.Models.MyModel>"%> <div> <% using (Html.BeginForm()) { Html.LabelFor(m => m.Name); Html.TextBoxFor(m => m.Name); Html.ValidationMessageFor(m => m.Name); } %> </div> And this is my Index.aspx file where I render the control: <%@ Page Language="C#" MasterPageFile="~/Views/Shared/Main.Master" Inherits="System.Web.Mvc.ViewPage<System.Collections.IEnumerable>" %> <asp:Content runat="server" ID="MainContent" ContentPlaceHolderID="MainContent"> This is my control test! <%Html.RenderPartial("MyFormControlView", new MyNamespace.Models.MyModel { Name = "MyTestName"}); %> </asp:Content> So, when I run my application the result is lonely caption: "This is my control test!" and there are no label or textbox on the generated page. If I inspect the source code of the generated page I can see my block, but it's inner text is empty. Please, could you help me?

    Read the article

  • ASP.NET MVC HandleError Attribute

    - by Ben Griswold
    Last Wednesday, I took a whopping 15 minutes out of my day and added ELMAH (Error Logging Modules and Handlers) to my ASP.NET MVC application.  If you haven’t heard the news (I hadn’t until recently), ELMAH does a killer job of logging and reporting nearly all unhandled exceptions.  As for handled exceptions, I’ve been using NLog but since I was already playing with the ELMAH bits I thought I’d see if I couldn’t replace it. Atif Aziz provided a quick solution in his answer to a Stack Overflow question.  I’ll let you consult his answer to see how one can subclass the HandleErrorAttribute and override the OnException method in order to get the bits working.  I pretty much took rolled the recommended logic into my application and it worked like a charm.  Along the way, I did uncover a few HandleError fact to which I wasn’t already privy.  Most of my learning came from Steven Sanderson’s book, Pro ASP.NET MVC Framework.  I’ve flipped through a bunch of the book and spent time on specific sections.  It’s a really good read if you’re looking to pick up an ASP.NET MVC reference. Anyway, my notes are found a comments in the following code snippet.  I hope my notes clarify a few things for you too. public class LogAndHandleErrorAttribute : HandleErrorAttribute {     public override void OnException(ExceptionContext context)     {         // A word from our sponsors:         //      http://stackoverflow.com/questions/766610/how-to-get-elmah-to-work-with-asp-net-mvc-handleerror-attribute         //      and Pro ASP.NET MVC Framework by Steven Sanderson         //         // Invoke the base implementation first. This should mark context.ExceptionHandled = true         // which stops ASP.NET from producing a "yellow screen of death." This also sets the         // Http StatusCode to 500 (internal server error.)         //         // Assuming Custom Errors aren't off, the base implementation will trigger the application         // to ultimately render the "Error" view from one of the following locations:         //         //      1. ~/Views/Controller/Error.aspx         //      2. ~/Views/Controller/Error.ascx         //      3. ~/Views/Shared/Error.aspx         //      4. ~/Views/Shared/Error.ascx         //         // "Error" is the default view, however, a specific view may be provided as an Attribute property.         // A notable point is the Custom Errors defaultRedirect is not considered in the redirection plan.         base.OnException(context);           var e = context.Exception;                  // If the exception is unhandled, simply return and let Elmah handle the unhandled exception.         // Otherwise, try to use error signaling which involves the fully configured pipeline like logging,         // mailing, filtering and what have you). Failing that, see if the error should be filtered.         // If not, the error simply logged the exception.         if (!context.ExceptionHandled                || RaiseErrorSignal(e)                   || IsFiltered(context))                  return;           LogException(e); // FYI. Simple Elmah logging doesn't handle mail notifications.     }

    Read the article

  • Can static methods be called using object/instance in .NET

    Ans is Yes and No   Yes in C++, Java and VB.NET No in C#   This is only compiler restriction in c#. You might see in some websites that we can break this restriction using reflection and delegates, but we can’t, according to my little research J I shall try to explain you…   Following is code sample to break this rule using reflection, it seems that it is possible to call a static method using an object, p1 using System; namespace T {     class Program     {         static void Main()         {             var p1 = new Person() { Name = "Smith" };             typeof(Person).GetMethod("TestStatMethod").Invoke(p1, new object[] { });                     }         class Person         {             public string Name { get; set; }             public static void TestStatMethod()             {                 Console.WriteLine("Hello");             }         }     } } but I do not think so this method is being called using p1 rather Type Name “Person”. I shall try to prove this… look at another example…  Test2 has been inherited from Test1. Let’s see various scenarios… Scenario1 using System; namespace T {     class Program     {         static void Main()         {             Test1 t = new Test1();            typeof(Test2).GetMethod("Method1").Invoke(t,                                  new object[] { });         }     }     class Test1     {         public static void Method1()         {             Console.WriteLine("At test1::Method1");         }     }       class Test2 : Test1     {         public static void Method1()         {             Console.WriteLine("At test1::Method2");         }     } } Output:   At test1::Method2 Scenario2         static void Main()         {             Test2 t = new Test2();            typeof(Test2).GetMethod("Method1").Invoke(t,                                          new object[] { });         }   Output:   At test1::Method2   Scenario3         static void Main()         {             Test1 t = new Test2();            typeof(Test2).GetMethod("Method1").Invoke(t,                             new object[] { });         }   Output: At test1::Method2 In all above scenarios output is same, that means, Reflection also not considering the object what you pass to Invoke method in case of static methods. It is always considering the type which you specify in typeof(). So, what is the use passing instance to “Invoke”. Let see below sample using System; namespace T {     class Program     {         static void Main()         {            typeof(Test2).GetMethod("Method1").                Invoke(null, new object[] { });         }     }       class Test1     {         public static void Method1()         {             Console.WriteLine("At test1::Method1");         }     }     class Test2 : Test1     {         public static void Method1()         {             Console.WriteLine("At test1::Method2");         }     } }   Output is   At test1::Method2   I was able to call Invoke “Method1” of Test2 without any object.  Yes, there no wonder here as Method1 is static. So we may conclude that static methods cannot be called using instances (only in c#) Why Microsoft has restricted it in C#? Ans: Really there Is no use calling static methods using objects because static methods are stateless. but still Java and C++ latest compilers allow calling static methods using instances. Java sample class Test {      public static void main(String str[])      {            Person p = new Person();            System.out.println(p.GetCount());      } }   class Person {   public static int GetCount()   {      return 100;   } }   Output          100 span.fullpost {display:none;}

    Read the article

  • Does Java Spring 3.0 MVC support annotation/attribute based client side validation like Asp.net MVC

    - by Athens
    In Asp.Net MVC 2.0, at least in the beta, you could decoration your model classes with data annotation attributes and enable client side validation that leverages that criteria defined in your model data annotation attibutes. Is there anything similar for Java Spring MVC 3.0? Is it possible to inject a component into the response pipeline that can inspect the model's annotated properties and render client side validation logic to complement the server side validation logic that is invoked prior to the controller handling the request?

    Read the article

  • ViewStateMode in ASP.Net 4.0

    - by sreejukg
    When asp.net introduced the concept of viewstate, it changed the way how developers maintain the state for the controls in a web page. Until then to keep the track of the control(in classic asp), it was the developer responsibility to manually assign the posted content before rendering the control again. Viewstate made allowed the developer to do it with ease. The developers are not bothered about how controls keep there state on post back. Viewstate is rendered to the browser as a hidden variable __viewstate. Since viewstate stores the values of all controls, as the number of controls in the page increases, the content of viewstate grows large. It causes some websites to load slowly. As developers we need viewstate, but actually we do not want this for all the controls in the page. Till asp.net 3.5, if viewstate is disabled from web.config (using <pages viewstate=”false”/> ..</pages>), then you can not enable it from the control level/page level. Both <%@ Page EnableViewState=”true”…. and <asp:textbox EnableViewState=”true” will not work in this case. Lot of developers demands for more control over viewstate. It will be useful if the developers are able to disable it for the entire page and enable it for only those controls that needed viewstate. With ASP.NET 4.0, this is possible, a happy news for the developers. This is achieved by introducing a new property called ViewStateMode. Let us see, What is ViewStateMode – Is a new property in asp.net 4.0, that allows developers to enable viewstate for individual control even if the parent has disabled it. This ViewStateMode property can contain either of three values Enabled- Enable view state for the control even if the parent control has view state disabled. Disabled - Disable view state for this control even if the parent control has view state enabled Inherit - Inherit the value of ViewStateMode from the parent, this is the default value. To disable view state for a page and to enable it for a specific control on the page, you can set the EnableViewState property of the page to true, then set the ViewStateMode property of the page to Disabled, and then set the ViewStateMode property of the control to Enabled. Find the example below. Page directive - <%@ Page Language="C#"  EnableViewState="True" ViewStateMode="Disabled" .......... %> Code for the control  - <asp:TextBox runat="server" ViewStateMode="Enabled" ............../> Now the viewstate will be disabled for the whole page, but enabled for the TextBox. ViewStateMode gives developers more control over the viewstate.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53  | Next Page >