Why Can't I use asp.net controls with mvc?
-
In mvc asp.net controls are not working. Is it my error or we can't use it with mvc?
-
In mvc asp.net controls are not working. Is it my error or we can't use it with mvc?
-
In mvc asp.net controls are not working. Is it my error or we can't use it with mvc?
It's just a different technology based on a different framework, it's like asking "Why can't I use Spanish in Russia?" If you want to use webform controls then use a webforms project. If you want to use mvc you'll need to the Html helper classes to do basic things like textboxes, checkboxes, dropdowns etc, and for more advanced things like "webgrid" etc there are some off-the-shelf mvc plug-ins you can use, or you'll just need to get familiar with html\http and implement it all yourself.
-
In mvc asp.net controls are not working. Is it my error or we can't use it with mvc?
in one word Viewstate you can still use to controls on an asp.net (not razor version) MVC does give you the advantage of super light postbacks and responses but has. Where in mvc your information is being contained in the model (which obviously excludes ajax calls creates) But in my personal opinion asp.net does seem to take more of an object oriented approach to reusing controls , which makes developing massive information system a lot less painful and quicker ; but the tradeoff is a lot of information being parsed back and forth that you are most likely not going to use every time a button is clicked which is bad for high traffic sites.
Chona1171 Web Developer (C#), Silverlight
-
in one word Viewstate you can still use to controls on an asp.net (not razor version) MVC does give you the advantage of super light postbacks and responses but has. Where in mvc your information is being contained in the model (which obviously excludes ajax calls creates) But in my personal opinion asp.net does seem to take more of an object oriented approach to reusing controls , which makes developing massive information system a lot less painful and quicker ; but the tradeoff is a lot of information being parsed back and forth that you are most likely not going to use every time a button is clicked which is bad for high traffic sites.
Chona1171 Web Developer (C#), Silverlight
The first thing I have done on any webforms site I've built in the last 15 years is to disable viewstate globally so that it has to be explicitly enabled on any controls that need it. People keep bringing up viewstate as if it is a decisive issue, completely ignoring the fact that it can easily be turned off. People who go to MVC because of "viewstate" are simply bad webforms programmers and they will go on to be bad MVC programmers. Not a dig at you personally, it just gets my goat when people talk about viewstate as if it was some insurmountable evil.
-
The first thing I have done on any webforms site I've built in the last 15 years is to disable viewstate globally so that it has to be explicitly enabled on any controls that need it. People keep bringing up viewstate as if it is a decisive issue, completely ignoring the fact that it can easily be turned off. People who go to MVC because of "viewstate" are simply bad webforms programmers and they will go on to be bad MVC programmers. Not a dig at you personally, it just gets my goat when people talk about viewstate as if it was some insurmountable evil.
Hi I agree with you completely , what I normally do is put my viewstate in a session to avoid the big back and forth , and if you read my posts you'll find that they are completely pro ASP.Net over MVC All I am saying is if you are hell bend on squeezing the very last bit of performance out of your app MVC would be the way to go (it would take you way longer to code and you'll most likely get lazy debugging front end code and just start implementing bad practices) but I still prefer ASP.NET using N-Tier Architecture and good practices over MVC any day
Chona1171 Web Developer (C#), Silverlight