473,320 Members | 1,884 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
Post Job

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Join Bytes to post your question to a community of 473,320 software developers and data experts.

1.1 vs 2.0 - Multiple DLLs?

I'm finally getting around to migrating a "big" ASP.NET 1.1 app to 2.0. I've
been reading up on the differences and I'm NOT finding something I was lead
to believe was the case [about 2.0] a long time ago. I somehow was under the
impression that, when compiling an ASP.NET 2.0 app, that multiple dll files
were output for the project: one .dll per ASPX page/file. Gone was the day
when we could simply compile the project and get a single .dll that we could
then move to the production bin folder.

But in doing my current round of research to get up to speed on 2.0, I'm not
finding anything that supports that erstwhile understanding.

So - do we still get one big happy .dll in the bin folder for our ASP.NET
2.0 Web applications when we compile? Or do we really get multiple output
dlls (one per ASPX page/file).???

Thanks!
Jul 6 '07 #1
6 2102
Hello Bob,

Use "web deployment project" to control the dll compiling output http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/asp.net/aa336619.aspx
There you can change how your project will be build - with the single dll
or with several
---
WBR, Michael Nemtsev [.NET/C# MVP].
My blog: http://spaces.live.com/laflour
Team blog: http://devkids.blogspot.com/

"The greatest danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we
miss it, but that it is too low and we reach it" (c) Michelangelo

BJI'm finally getting around to migrating a "big" ASP.NET 1.1 app to
BJ2.0. I've been reading up on the differences and I'm NOT finding
BJsomething I was lead to believe was the case [about 2.0] a long time
BJago. I somehow was under the impression that, when compiling an
BJASP.NET 2.0 app, that multiple dll files were output for the
BJproject: one .dll per ASPX page/file. Gone was the day when we could
BJsimply compile the project and get a single .dll that we could then
BJmove to the production bin folder.
BJ>
BJBut in doing my current round of research to get up to speed on 2.0,
BJI'm not finding anything that supports that erstwhile understanding.
BJ>
BJSo - do we still get one big happy .dll in the bin folder for our
BJASP.NET 2.0 Web applications when we compile? Or do we really get
BJmultiple output dlls (one per ASPX page/file).???
BJ>
BJThanks!
BJ>
Jul 6 '07 #2
I'm assuming you're using VS to generate the project. VS 2005 SP 1
introduced the Web Application Project that works very similar to the VS
2002/3 web project and compiles everything into a single dll. The original
web project, called Web Site Project, that shipped with VS 2005 does have
this behavior. Mainly it uses a different directive to identify the code
seperated from the web page. It uses the CodeFile directive instead of the
CodeBehind. Unfortunatley, this can lead to some problems sharing code
amongst pages if they're in different directories since they don't
necessarily know about eachother. The way around this was the App_Code
directory, which gets compiled first and is available to all pages. The Web
Site Project was a nice idea, but so many people cried foul on it that MS
hurried and created the Web Application Project to give us the same
experience we were used to for 1.x development.
--
Hope this helps,
Mark Fitzpatrick
Microsoft FrontPage MVP 199?-2006. 2007 and beyond
"Bob Johnson" <A@B.COMwrote in message
news:uG**************@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
I'm finally getting around to migrating a "big" ASP.NET 1.1 app to 2.0.
I've been reading up on the differences and I'm NOT finding something I
was lead to believe was the case [about 2.0] a long time ago. I somehow
was under the impression that, when compiling an ASP.NET 2.0 app, that
multiple dll files were output for the project: one .dll per ASPX
page/file. Gone was the day when we could simply compile the project and
get a single .dll that we could then move to the production bin folder.

But in doing my current round of research to get up to speed on 2.0, I'm
not finding anything that supports that erstwhile understanding.

So - do we still get one big happy .dll in the bin folder for our ASP.NET
2.0 Web applications when we compile? Or do we really get multiple output
dlls (one per ASPX page/file).???

Thanks!

Jul 6 '07 #3
Thank you Mark... so, to cut to the chase on my scenario, is it true (given
what you wrote) that I will need to do the following to get my 1.1 app into
2.0 and get the single-dll-when-compiling experience I had in 1.1?

Step 1 - install SP1 for VS 2005 (I have not already done this)
Step 2 - open my 1.1 project in VS 2005 and let the conversion wizard take
over; converting everything to 2.0.
Step 3 - go on with life in the 2.0 world just like I would have in the 1.1
world (i.e, I can keep my carefully planned folder structure without having
to migrate it all to App_Code"; compile and get a single dll, etc).

Would you expect the above steps to get me where I want to go?

Separately, I do understand the option that Mr. Nemtsev presented - but I'd
prefer to avoid having to create a deployment project if I can get what I
want without creating the deployment project.

Thanks

-Bob

"Mark Fitzpatrick" <ma******@fitzme.comwrote in message
news:eR****************@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
I'm assuming you're using VS to generate the project. VS 2005 SP 1
introduced the Web Application Project that works very similar to the VS
2002/3 web project and compiles everything into a single dll. The original
web project, called Web Site Project, that shipped with VS 2005 does have
this behavior. Mainly it uses a different directive to identify the code
seperated from the web page. It uses the CodeFile directive instead of the
CodeBehind. Unfortunatley, this can lead to some problems sharing code
amongst pages if they're in different directories since they don't
necessarily know about eachother. The way around this was the App_Code
directory, which gets compiled first and is available to all pages. The
Web Site Project was a nice idea, but so many people cried foul on it that
MS hurried and created the Web Application Project to give us the same
experience we were used to for 1.x development.
--
Hope this helps,
Mark Fitzpatrick
Microsoft FrontPage MVP 199?-2006. 2007 and beyond
"Bob Johnson" <A@B.COMwrote in message
news:uG**************@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>I'm finally getting around to migrating a "big" ASP.NET 1.1 app to 2.0.
I've been reading up on the differences and I'm NOT finding something I
was lead to believe was the case [about 2.0] a long time ago. I somehow
was under the impression that, when compiling an ASP.NET 2.0 app, that
multiple dll files were output for the project: one .dll per ASPX
page/file. Gone was the day when we could simply compile the project and
get a single .dll that we could then move to the production bin folder.

But in doing my current round of research to get up to speed on 2.0, I'm
not finding anything that supports that erstwhile understanding.

So - do we still get one big happy .dll in the bin folder for our ASP.NET
2.0 Web applications when we compile? Or do we really get multiple output
dlls (one per ASPX page/file).???

Thanks!


Jul 6 '07 #4
just like 1.1, 2.0 creates a dll per page. with a deploy project you can
precompile 2.0 page dll's. with 1.1 these are created in a temp folder
at runtime (basically every recycle).

the difference between 2.0 and 1.1 (or 2.0 sp1 web applications) is the
codebehind handling. in 1.1 an extra dll is created thats the
codebehind. in 2.0 the codebehind is included in the page dll.

if you don't mind your 2.0 to having the same slow startup as 1.1, then
don't use deploy projects.

-- bruce (sqlwork.com)

Bob Johnson wrote:
Thank you Mark... so, to cut to the chase on my scenario, is it true (given
what you wrote) that I will need to do the following to get my 1.1 app into
2.0 and get the single-dll-when-compiling experience I had in 1.1?

Step 1 - install SP1 for VS 2005 (I have not already done this)
Step 2 - open my 1.1 project in VS 2005 and let the conversion wizard take
over; converting everything to 2.0.
Step 3 - go on with life in the 2.0 world just like I would have in the 1.1
world (i.e, I can keep my carefully planned folder structure without having
to migrate it all to App_Code"; compile and get a single dll, etc).

Would you expect the above steps to get me where I want to go?

Separately, I do understand the option that Mr. Nemtsev presented - but I'd
prefer to avoid having to create a deployment project if I can get what I
want without creating the deployment project.

Thanks

-Bob

"Mark Fitzpatrick" <ma******@fitzme.comwrote in message
news:eR****************@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>I'm assuming you're using VS to generate the project. VS 2005 SP 1
introduced the Web Application Project that works very similar to the VS
2002/3 web project and compiles everything into a single dll. The original
web project, called Web Site Project, that shipped with VS 2005 does have
this behavior. Mainly it uses a different directive to identify the code
seperated from the web page. It uses the CodeFile directive instead of the
CodeBehind. Unfortunatley, this can lead to some problems sharing code
amongst pages if they're in different directories since they don't
necessarily know about eachother. The way around this was the App_Code
directory, which gets compiled first and is available to all pages. The
Web Site Project was a nice idea, but so many people cried foul on it that
MS hurried and created the Web Application Project to give us the same
experience we were used to for 1.x development.
--
Hope this helps,
Mark Fitzpatrick
Microsoft FrontPage MVP 199?-2006. 2007 and beyond
"Bob Johnson" <A@B.COMwrote in message
news:uG**************@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>I'm finally getting around to migrating a "big" ASP.NET 1.1 app to 2.0.
I've been reading up on the differences and I'm NOT finding something I
was lead to believe was the case [about 2.0] a long time ago. I somehow
was under the impression that, when compiling an ASP.NET 2.0 app, that
multiple dll files were output for the project: one .dll per ASPX
page/file. Gone was the day when we could simply compile the project and
get a single .dll that we could then move to the production bin folder.

But in doing my current round of research to get up to speed on 2.0, I'm
not finding anything that supports that erstwhile understanding.

So - do we still get one big happy .dll in the bin folder for our ASP.NET
2.0 Web applications when we compile? Or do we really get multiple output
dlls (one per ASPX page/file).???

Thanks!

Jul 6 '07 #5
Actually, the more important one is the web application project:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/asp.net/aa336618.aspx

--
Gregory A. Beamer
MVP; MCP: +I, SE, SD, DBA
http://gregorybeamer.spaces.live.com
Co-author: Microsoft Expression Web Bible (upcoming)

************************************************
Think outside the box!
************************************************
"Michael Nemtsev" <ne*****@msn.comwrote in message
news:a2***************************@msnews.microsof t.com...
Hello Bob,

Use "web deployment project" to control the dll compiling output
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/asp.net/aa336619.aspx
There you can change how your project will be build - with the single dll
or with several
---
WBR, Michael Nemtsev [.NET/C# MVP]. My blog:
http://spaces.live.com/laflour
Team blog: http://devkids.blogspot.com/

"The greatest danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we
miss it, but that it is too low and we reach it" (c) Michelangelo

BJI'm finally getting around to migrating a "big" ASP.NET 1.1 app to
BJ2.0. I've been reading up on the differences and I'm NOT finding
BJsomething I was lead to believe was the case [about 2.0] a long time
BJago. I somehow was under the impression that, when compiling an
BJASP.NET 2.0 app, that multiple dll files were output for the
BJproject: one .dll per ASPX page/file. Gone was the day when we could
BJsimply compile the project and get a single .dll that we could then
BJmove to the production bin folder.
BJBJBut in doing my current round of research to get up to speed on
2.0,
BJI'm not finding anything that supports that erstwhile understanding.
BJBJSo - do we still get one big happy .dll in the bin folder for our
BJASP.NET 2.0 Web applications when we compile? Or do we really get
BJmultiple output dlls (one per ASPX page/file).???
BJBJThanks!
BJ>

Jul 6 '07 #6
Thanks Bruce, RE:
<< if you don't mind your 2.0 to having the same slow startup as 1.1, then
don't use deploy projects. >>

Okay I *do* mind that. So, given this additional consideration/benefit of
using 2.0 (precompilation) - is there any general recommendation as to which
VS 2005 project type to migrate to (from 1.1) ---Web Site Project vs. Web
Application Project (ala 2005/SP1) --- and given my objectives as listed
below:

OBJECTIVES
1. Migrate from 1.1 to 2.0 and KEEP my existing non trivial 1.1 file/folder
structure organization.
2. Compile to one .dll (for ease of updating production -- I don't want to
have to keep track of and move [up to] dozens of .dlls to production for
maintenance releases)
3. Gain the benefits of 2.0 precompilation (for faster [than 1.1] startups).

Please comment on the following plan: Does it seem like a reasonable
strategy ? given the above objectives?

1. I will migrate the old 2003/1.1 project to the new Web Application
Project (ala 2005/SP1).

2. I will then create a deployment project (for precompilation purposes).

Thanks again for your perspectives.
Jul 6 '07 #7

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

Similar topics

2
by: Johann Blake | last post by:
I can hardly believe I'm the first one to report this, but having gone through the newsgroup, it appears that way. I would like to open a solution in the VS.NET IDE that consists of multiple...
8
by: Jan | last post by:
We have a VB dll that invokes a C# dll. The C# dll references 3 other dlls - one is a .NET dll, the other two are win32 COM dlls. I have a script that invokes the VB dll which in turn...
1
by: Arne | last post by:
All my code behind pages gets compiled into one DLL. I would like to redirect my code behind into multiple DLLs so that I get more flexibility when installing new features to a web site. I am adding...
0
by: Lasse Nilsson | last post by:
Hi all, I've got a deployment issue I hope is solvable at all, and appreciate all help anyone can give me. We've got an ASP.NET-application (a sort of function library shared by our customers,...
2
by: Samuel L Matzen | last post by:
Hi, I am trying to develop with multiple projects in a single solution. The many of these projects create .dlls that are used by other projects. When I reference a .dll I reference it in the...
3
by: Claudio Pacciarini | last post by:
Hi everyone, I have a question about .NET code sharing and reuse, and also about application design best practices / guidelines. Currently, we have many different .NET projects in source...
0
by: erikjalevik | last post by:
I have now spent the best part of a day trying to find out how to distribute our unmanaged C++ app built with a newly purchased copy of VS2005. As per all the other posts, it runs fine on the dev...
0
by: Dave | last post by:
Hello all, Firstly I hate Citrix, especially their programming interface MFCOM. There are multiple versions, that seem to need to match an SDK Version <----Citrix Server Version This is bad...
2
by: Patrick Stinson | last post by:
Is it a correct to assume that you can use multiple instances of python altogether if each is loaded from a separate dll? For instance, if I write a couple of dll/so libs, and each has python...
3
by: Patrice | last post by:
Hi all, I'm currently upgrading a 1.1 application. We were using a command file to invoke the command line compiler to that we have the code behind compiled into multiple DLLs (to be able to...
0
by: DolphinDB | last post by:
The formulas of 101 quantitative trading alphas used by WorldQuant were presented in the paper 101 Formulaic Alphas. However, some formulas are complex, leading to challenges in calculation. Take...
0
by: DolphinDB | last post by:
Tired of spending countless mintues downsampling your data? Look no further! In this article, you’ll learn how to efficiently downsample 6.48 billion high-frequency records to 61 million...
0
by: ryjfgjl | last post by:
ExcelToDatabase: batch import excel into database automatically...
0
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe meeting will be on Wednesday 6 Mar 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC) and finishing at about 19:15 (7.15PM). In this month's session, we are pleased to welcome back...
1
isladogs
by: isladogs | last post by:
The next Access Europe meeting will be on Wednesday 6 Mar 2024 starting at 18:00 UK time (6PM UTC) and finishing at about 19:15 (7.15PM). In this month's session, we are pleased to welcome back...
0
by: Vimpel783 | last post by:
Hello! Guys, I found this code on the Internet, but I need to modify it a little. It works well, the problem is this: Data is sent from only one cell, in this case B5, but it is necessary that data...
0
by: Defcon1945 | last post by:
I'm trying to learn Python using Pycharm but import shutil doesn't work
0
by: Shællîpôpï 09 | last post by:
If u are using a keypad phone, how do u turn on JavaScript, to access features like WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram....
0
by: af34tf | last post by:
Hi Guys, I have a domain whose name is BytesLimited.com, and I want to sell it. Does anyone know about platforms that allow me to list my domain in auction for free. Thank you

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.