Re: Is Visual Studio .NET ideal for ASP.NET + HTML site?
From: GlennDoten (gdoten_at_gmail.com)
Date: 08/04/04
- Next message: Ryan Riddell: "RE: Redirecting from a Controller page"
- Previous message: Henry: "Re: how to encrypt database password in web.config file"
- Maybe in reply to: Don Wash: "Is Visual Studio .NET ideal for ASP.NET + HTML site?"
- Next in thread: Scott M.: "Re: Is Visual Studio .NET ideal for ASP.NET + HTML site?"
- Reply: Scott M.: "Re: Is Visual Studio .NET ideal for ASP.NET + HTML site?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 4 Aug 2004 10:53:30 -0700
Scott M. wrote:
> > More excuses. FP'02 and '03 fix the HTML designer. Yeah, right,
I've
> > been listening to that since FP 1.0.
>
> Not excuses. I don't work for MS. I am a developer just like you.
But
> instead of moaning about something I don't like, I try to find ways
to make
> it better. Have you actually used and looked at the setting choices
in FP
> 02/03 or are you just lumping all your FP experiences together?
Sorry, there is no way to make FP better. Yes, somewhat
tongue-in-cheek, but there are far easier tools to use for FP type
stuff rather than try to make MS' product do what it should do (after 7
years of waiting, no less).
> > Of course, we use that line at
> > work too: "it ain't a bug, it's a feature". :-)
> > The link someone posted to the MS guy's weblog definitely admits
that
> > the stuff that VS does to HTML is indeed bugs. Sure, he has a lot
of
> > excuses for why it does what it does but they are still bugs. Just
> > because they chose to use some code for IE for the designer and it
> > can't do what a web developer needs doesn't mean that VS' HTML
designer
> > works correctly. He claims this is fixed in Whidbey but I don't
know
> > when I'll be able to test this.
>
> Listen, call it what you like, but to me "bug" means unexpected and
> unintended results.
Me too.
> > And yes, VS'02 and '03 can corrupt HTML so that it no longer works
> > preperly. If you haven't seen this happen then you haven't used VS'
> > designer/HTML views enough. There's no arguing that; it's a fact,
> > unfortunately.
>
> Instead of throwing around insinuations about how experienced you are
and
> how inexperienced I must be, try to be open minded and polite, would
you? I
> have been working with .NET since before it was .NET (ASP+). I have
plenty
> of experience and exposure to the software. I have seen what you
have
> described happen to others, but (in all honesty) it hasn't happen to
me
> because I understand what VS .NET is doing and how my changes will
impact
> the internal workings of the designer. Anything can become corrupted
if you
> bend it enough.
I don't believe I've thrown any insults around and I'm certainly not
insinuating anything, so don't be so touchy, ok? You just don't want to
accept the fact that VS has these bugs. I'm sure you are quite
experienced but *anyone* who opens VS, makes a web form page, makes
changes in the designer, then goes back to HTML view *will* see these
bugs appear. This is a fact and I don't know why you seem to be taking
offense to that. And this isn't "bending" the tool by any stretch of
the imagination - the tool just doesn't work properly. And it doesn't
matter what options are set or not.
I thought you said you weren't going to argue. :-)
-- -glenn-
- Next message: Ryan Riddell: "RE: Redirecting from a Controller page"
- Previous message: Henry: "Re: how to encrypt database password in web.config file"
- Maybe in reply to: Don Wash: "Is Visual Studio .NET ideal for ASP.NET + HTML site?"
- Next in thread: Scott M.: "Re: Is Visual Studio .NET ideal for ASP.NET + HTML site?"
- Reply: Scott M.: "Re: Is Visual Studio .NET ideal for ASP.NET + HTML site?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
