Coffeehouse Thread

17 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

Good or bad idea? (alternative for WebForms)

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    TommyCarlier

    Sometimes I have these moments of clarity, when I think of nothing, and suddenly thoughts and ideas come to me (this usually happens when I'm sitting on the toilet). 10 minutes ago, this idea popped into my head that could be either a good idea or a bad idea. ASP.NET is a great technology, but sometimes, I feel it's too big and complex for some kinds of websites and online services. Would it be a good or a bad idea to try developing a web platform in .NET, not based on ASP.NET? A platform with a totally different architecture, lighter and maybe faster?

  • User profile image
    Maurits

    Sounds good to me.  Subclass from TCPListener?

  • User profile image
    Karim

    Don't too much care about "light" (disk space/memory to spare), don't care too much about "fast" (don't need to shave a quarter second off the page load)

    I do care about "secure," "robust," "easy to use."

    If you can deliver those three AND get rid of idiotic things like

     d = DataGrid1.Controls[0].Controls[footerIndex].FindControl("DropDownList1") as DropDownList

    then sign me up for an SDK.  LOL

  • User profile image
    TommyCarlier

    Well, I don't mean 'replace HTTP'. I mean, create a different architecture for web applications and websites. It's still based on HTTP, it still produces HTML (and other formats). It would just replace the ASP.NET architecture. No WebForms, no view state. Taking full advantage of .NET 2.0, and not having to worry about backward compatibility with .NET 1.x or pre-.NET ASP.

  • User profile image
    TommyCarlier

    Karim, with light, I meant light as in small/fast but also: a light API, a light interface. And I haven't thought about it thoroughly yet. Like I said, it's something that just popped in my head. And I just posted it here to get some feedback before working out the details.

  • User profile image
    Devils​Rejection

    Karim wrote:
    don't care too much about "fast" (don't need to shave a quarter second off the page load)


    blasphemy!

    page render time is very very important.

  • User profile image
    Karim

    DevilsRejection wrote:
    Karim wrote: don't care too much about "fast" (don't need to shave a quarter second off the page load)


    blasphemy!

    page render time is very very important.


    LOL  Ah, yes, I was young once too... Big Smile

  • User profile image
    Karim

    Beer28 wrote:
    you could compile php to MSIL, though that would be a total and utter waste of time.


    So I guess working with Linux makes one an expert on wasting time...

  • User profile image
    Tom Servo

    Beer28 wrote:
    you could compile php to MSIL, though that would be a total and utter waste of time.

    Yes, because if the host platform is Windows based, why would anyone think of using a way to make sure that the PHP ends up in native code, even if it has to go through a compiling and JIT stage? I mean, seriously!

  • User profile image
    Tom Servo

    And you don't seem to have much of an idea what Zend does. It turns PHP into bytecode, that then gets "optimized" (whatever that means) if you use their "optimizer", but at the end is still interpreted bytecode. It's just faster because the parsing step falls away. Phalanger, the PHP compiler for .NET, spits out MSIL, that again will be turned into real native code by the .NET JIT.

    Then again, I'm not surprised that you're trying to discredit anything from MS in any way possible.

  • User profile image
    Devils​Rejection

    Karim wrote:
    DevilsRejection wrote:
    Karim wrote: don't care too much about "fast" (don't need to shave a quarter second off the page load)


    blasphemy!

    page render time is very very important.


    LOL  Ah, yes, I was young once too...


    What's so bad about wanting performance? 10k rpm hard drives, dual core box, 2gb of ram, what what you jealous punk Tongue Out

    just messing with you, but seriously people will stop using your service if they feel they are being limited by the machine. thats why i love AMD's onboard memory controller, with low latency ram, and SMP for life.

  • User profile image
    Steve411

    Karim wrote:
    Don't too much care about "light" (disk space/memory to spare), don't care too much about "fast" (don't need to shave a quarter second off the page load)

    I do care about "secure," "robust," "easy to use."

    If you can deliver those three AND get rid of idiotic things like

     d = DataGrid1.Controls[0].Controls[footerIndex].FindControl("DropDownList1") as DropDownList

    then sign me up for an SDK.  LOL


    Speed would fits under easy to use.

    - Steve

  • User profile image
    TommyCarlier

    Compiling PHP to MSIL was not what I was thinking of. That means 'backward compatibility with a legacy platform'. My idea is: a new .NET-based, multi-layered web architecture, created from scratch, taking advantage of .NET 2.0 features, that doesn't have to be compatible with other platforms. It only has to be compatible with the basic web technologies like HTTP, (X)HTML, RSS, ...

  • User profile image
    leighsword

    Steve411 wrote:
    Karim wrote:Don't too much care about "light" (disk space/memory to spare), don't care too much about "fast" (don't need to shave a quarter second off the page load)

    I do care about "secure," "robust," "easy to use."

    If you can deliver those three AND get rid of idiotic things like

     d = DataGrid1.Controls[0].Controls[footerIndex].FindControl("DropDownList1") as DropDownList

    then sign me up for an SDK.  LOL


    Speed would fits under easy to use.

    - Steve

    right, the server code needs to refresh(reload) your WebPage in every call, it's unacceptable, now XMLHttpRequest(e.g. AJAX) may be a good solution.
    hope the following code works in VS2006
    <script language='Client C#'>
    DropDownList d = window.document.DataGrid1.Controls[0].Controls[footerIndex].FindControls("DropDownList1") as DropDownList;
    </script>

  • User profile image
    leighsword

    TommyCarlier wrote:
    Sometimes I have these moments of clarity, when I think of nothing, and suddenly thoughts and ideas come to me (this usually happens when I'm sitting on the toilet). 10 minutes ago, this idea popped into my head that could be either a good idea or a bad idea. ASP.NET is a great technology, but sometimes, I feel it's too big and complex for some kinds of websites and online services. Would it be a good or a bad idea to try developing a web platform in .NET, not based on ASP.NET? A platform with a totally different architecture, lighter and maybe faster?

    The furture is a Uniform Platform, write it once, run both IE and Windows.
    For example:
    When I was draged a button control to design window, the generating code is <Button name=button1 text=mybutton></Button>.
    If I am clicking the 'Building Web Form' menu item, I will get something like <asp:Button id=button1 text=mybutton></asp:Button> and WebControls.Button button1, if I am clicking the 'Building Win Form' menu item, I will get something like Windows.Form.Button button1.
    In fact, we should not care our CIL code which is WinForm or WebForm.




  • User profile image
    TommyCarlier

    I think a different paradigm should be used for web applications. I feel that WebForms uses an artificial model, to make it look like WinForms. It tries to be stateful, via view state, and events are fired via postback. I think this model produces a lot of applications that produce large HTML-pages and that could be a lot faster, and require less and smaller communication.

  • User profile image
    TommyCarlier

    I just read this cool article, and realized it's not ASP.NET I want to replace, it's just WebForms. Apparently, you can use ASP.NET without WebForms, via HttpHandlers. WebForms is just an HttpHandler. Very cool.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.