No. We still support code behind, and in fact, support of classic ASP apps
feels unnatural whenever there's more than a few lines of code kicking off
a COM object. We went the COM component route for our apps for all but the
simplest ASP app, so .NET code behind has the same feel as working within a
COM component, except that you don't have to GetObjectContext etc stuff to
work with the server objects and such, which SHOULD seem unnatural when you
go back to it after being away in .NET for a while.
Wait till the wind shifts, and you'll be back in vogue again. I believe
clear separation of responsibiliy in software is still a higher-level power
to answer to.
Steve Holak
Senior Software Architect
Brokerage Concepts IS Dept.
610-491-4879
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Richard Birkby
<rbirkby@THUNDERMA To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
IN.COM> cc:
Sent by: dotnet Subject: Re: [DOTNET] Disable
generation of code behind in IDE
discussion
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]
VELOP.COM>
04/12/2002 12:01
PM
Please respond to
dotnet discussion
Why does everyone suddenly want to move away from code-behind?
First there's an MSDN chat about it, and now an IDE which supports it.
I know that Code-Behind is unnatural for classic-ASP developers due to it's
compile-first mentality, but has everyone but me decided it's a Bad Idea?.
Richard
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dotnet discussion [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Farhan
> Sent: 12 April 2002 16:52
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [DOTNET] Disable generation of code behind in IDE
>
>
> is there anyway to disable code behind generation in VS IDE?
>
> Thanks,
> Farhan
>
> You can read messages from the DOTNET archive, unsubscribe from DOTNET,
or
> subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at http://discuss.develop.com.
You can read messages from the DOTNET archive, unsubscribe from DOTNET, or
subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at http://discuss.develop.com.
You can read messages from the DOTNET archive, unsubscribe from DOTNET, or
subscribe to other DevelopMentor lists at http://discuss.develop.com.
