V1.1 compilation model in V2.0 - Loading of UserControls across VDirs

[Anders Borum]

Hello!

I was wondering if I am the only person missing the option of outputting a
single dll for a website (just like the good old v1.1 compilation model)?

What I'm looking for is the ASP.NET framework to keep away from creating
random namespaces for each directory. The new build projects from the
Microsoft team shows promising, but I am not aware if the compilation model
is flexible enough to allow the "old" model ..

My question originates from the discovery of lack of flexibility, previously
available in the 1.1 model, related to loading of e.g. UserControls (or
plain controls) from virtual directories. Keeping concrete UserControl
classes in seperate C# projects (or the app_code directory) is looking to be
a maintenance nightmare (and is definately not providing a "doing more with
less" approach).

I agree that the new "publishing" compilation models are a great step
forward (especially when it comes to RAD development - i.e. no more long
compilations), but I wish the ASP.NET team had seen this coming.

Lots of frameworks are built around dynamic control loading.

Comments? Am I missing something?

 

[Bruce Barker]

even 1.1 produced a dll per page. the difference in 2.0 is the code behind
in the page dll, rather then one shared dll.

if you want to share a user control, you have a couple options:

1) create an abstract class that exposes the public properties in the
appcode dir, and have the usercontrol inherit/implement the
methods/properties.

2) don't use a code behind file (the asp.net 2.0 original design), and place
the all the code in the user control aspx file.

3) dump user controls altogether and write server controls. (my approach).

-- bruce (sqlwork.com)