5 ms·
This pretty much sums up why I'm sometimes hesitant to use frameworks: should my problem evolve past the boundaries of the framework it can become more of a pai
by tarkin2 17y ago
This pretty much sums up why I'm sometimes hesitant to use frameworks: should my problem evolve past the boundaries of the framework it can become more of a pain to use the framework than the raw constructs.
When it's no big deal to stick to the framework's boundaries, or the framework interoperates well, clearly and easily with custom lower-level code, then it seems wise to use such a framework.
The latter--interoperability with lower level code--does not seem to be true for ASP.NET based on my brief experience.
- javanix 17y agoOh yes. I started a fairly large program at work earlier this year and used Struts2 to start off. Things went swimmingly until I started having to modify the template files, and from there I was spending far more time fighting the framework. Ended up scratching it and building my own "framework" that works better for our project in about a month.
- LargeWu 17y agoThe real problem with ASP.NET is that the abstraction it provides is completely divorced from the way the web actually works. It tries to provide a stateful way to program, and it is completely driven by events. Sure it exposes the response and request, but trying to use those in anything but the most trivial ways is a complete mess It was great when I was just starting out as a web programmer and I didn't understand how the web worked. Now that I do get it, ASP.NET Webforms is a hassle at best and maddening at worst.
- cartano 17y agoYou should check out ASP.NET MVC. No postback, viewstate, and other junk, just request and response.