|
Razor is a rendering engine, MVC is a a web architecture, you can't compare the two. The "V" in Microsoft's MVC is usually Razor.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, but Razor Pages is the new .NET Core approach that is based on the framework but is structured differently. I thought the same, somehow I was not tracking on this either:
Introduction to Razor Pages in ASP.NET Core | Microsoft Docs
"Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity."
- Hanlon's Razor
|
|
|
|
|
Ya, I was confused and thinking I didn't know what I was doing.
I agree with your statement.
Everyone is born right handed. Only the strongest overcome it.
Fight for left-handed rights and hand equality.
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks to good naming strategies of Microsoft there is a huge confusion about this...
There is MVC's - de facto standard - HTML rendering engine named Razor... and there is .NET Core's MVVM framework named Razor Pages (probably named because the basic syntax is the same as in Razor rendering engine and the HTML rendering part IS the Razor rendering engine)...
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge". Stephen Hawking, 1942- 2018
|
|
|
|
|
Thanks for the clarification, I knew he was probably referring to Core, I was being slightly facetious  I didn't know they've called it Razor Pages though.
|
|
|
|
|
I have found MVC to be a powerful addition to my toolset but I must admit that the way MS implemented various facets can be confusing at times (I'm looking at you routing).
Pros:
I like to be able to write code loops right there in the HTML markup (list/table building is easier)
You can apply filters which execute on each request to an entire controller or a single action (no repeated session management boilerplate code)
Loose coupling between models and controllers
Cons:
Routing can become painful as web sites grow larger and deeper
Documentation for the under-the-hood parts is spartan
Far to many string literals required controller code
if (Object.DividedByZero == true) { Universe.Implode(); }
|
|
|
|
|
|
The big difference between the two come down to project organization.
Project Organization is related to two things:
1. Where the files (Views, Models, etc) -- not a big deal
2. Nuget packages -- how you deploy your MVC site - which can be a major pain when you move from one version of MVC to another (or to .NET Core Razor Pages).
However, you will find that you can relatively easily:
1. start out with VSTudio 2015 ASP.NET MVC (whatever version it is)
2. Move to .NET Core Razor Pages (or .NET Core MVC a very similar option) whenever you are ready.
The main thing to keep in mind is to :
1. Create real models for your domain objects
2. Use the Service and repository pattern for data access
3. Keep your Controllers and Views organized.
This will allow you move to .NET Core Razor Pages with little or no trouble at all.
In the future you'll just:
1. create a .NET Razor Pages Project
2. Move your Views, Controllers, Models in.
3. build and run.
It'll be pretty much that easy. The Razor code is the same and the Controller and View code will be okay too.
So, the point is, go ahead and use VSTudio 2015 ASP.NET MVC now and convert later.
You'll be fine. Good luck.
|
|
|
|
|
Might I suggest QlikView.  ...ducking for cover. Well, we know it's on the approved list.
"Go forth into the source" - Neal Morse
|
|
|
|
|
I honestly don't know if Qlikview is on the USAF's approved list.
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Each has his/her own taste. Personally, I hated things that intermingled control code with UI code, server code and UI code such as Razor. I preferred straight HTML+CSS+JavaScript and keep them in separate files/folders. Anything that requires a render engine to process a page before the browser sees it scares me. Any page that I can not open into the browser by double clicking on the File Explorer is bad.
|
|
|
|
|
Wow. Try to help some dudes out and all I get is harsh treatment.
I wasn't even being bowing to my nature as a smartass...
".45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly" - JSOP, 2010
-----
You can never have too much ammo - unless you're swimming, or on fire. - JSOP, 2010
-----
When you pry the gun from my cold dead hands, be careful - the barrel will be very hot. - JSOP, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
Same for me, it's not very motivating, so I'm doing a lot less Q&A recently 
|
|
|
|
|
In a fairly large WinForm I have a checkbox for an option that is no longer supposed to be used. That's why I am supposed to set the checkbox and several controls that are related to this option invisible.
That's not hard, but there are also older rows in the database which still used this option. In this case the controls must become visible again, the data is filled in as before, but the controls are disabled to prevent changes.
Fine. The checkbox is set by data binding, but visibility can't be bound to the same flag. That's why I wanted to set the visibility of all controls in the Checked Changed() eventhandler of the checkbox.
That works, but only as long as I don't initially set the checkbox invisible. Data binding obviously only is performed on visible controls! The other controls are properly filled, even when they are invisible. Only the checkbox is not checked, the other controls remain invisible and, as the cherry on top, the validation of the form fails because at least one option must be checked.
Thanks, Mickeysoft! How long did we have that bug? Was it since .Net 1.0 or really from .Net 2.0 on?
I have lived with several Zen masters - all of them were cats.
His last invention was an evil Lasagna. It didn't kill anyone, and it actually tasted pretty good.
|
|
|
|
|
i know it's not the q&a section but did you try putting the [visible] checkbox on an invisible panel? (weirder things have happened in vs).
next idea: hide the checkbox under some other control
or maybe easiest of all: set it's location off the side/bottom of the form (and ensure TabStop is false.)
As the wise one once said: silly problem require sillier answer.
Message Signature
(Click to edit ->)
|
|
|
|
|
Applaud role reversal? What nonsense! (8)
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. - Mark Twain
|
|
|
|
|
Applaud CLAP
role reversal TRAP What nonsense!
CLAPTRAP
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
We have a winner!
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. - Mark Twain
|
|
|
|
|
Particularly the "People who bought this also bought" bit.
I was looking for a vacuum seal storage tub, so I could freeze Samphire without it getting broken, and I found one on Amazon but wasn't sure it was freezer safe. Then I noticed the "People who bought ..." section.
The vacuum tub.
A "herb grinder"
A 30lb bag of Gummy Bears.
Ah. I know what they are storing then ... 
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Spaced out Haribos!
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: I know what they are storing then
Marijuana-infused gummy bears?
|
|
|
|
|
All that's missing are the cheese balls and a bean bag chair.
|
|
|
|
|
Makes me remember.
A couple of years back my kids were into soap bubbles, a lot.
So I thought I surprise them and started researching professional soap bubble liquid.
It didn't take very long to realize that long chained PEO, PolyEthylenOxide, is the way to go. When mixed with water it forms very strong selfhealing, oilproof and slippery surfaces.
More research gives that Dow chemicals are selling this stuff for use by veterinarians and surgeons.
I should probably have checked what they use it for.
When searching for the stuff on Amazon I got quite a surprise by the "People who bought this also bought" section.
It was also a bit late to realize that it could have been a bad idea to use my wifes amazon account. 
|
|
|
|
|
I just checked.
Hopefully, there were no pictures? 
Sent from my Amstrad PC 1640
Never throw anything away, Griff
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
AntiTwitter: @DalekDave is now a follower!
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
