Re: Difference between ASP.NET Website and ASP.NET Application

On Apr 17, 6:38 pm, Stan <goo...@philphall.me.uk> wrote:
> On 17 Apr, 18:41, daveh551 <gee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> 
> 
> 
> 
>
> Hi
>
> The project form of a web app is similar to the previous version of
> visual studio (VS2003) where everything is compiled into a DLL
> assembly file. ASP.NET 1.1 could only support "code behind" in this
> manner, the alternative being script embedded in the .aspx files.
>
> ASP.NET 2.0 allows code behind files (.cs files) to accompany
> the .aspx in the deployed version, whereupon it is compiled "on the
> fly" by the web server. The "web site" form of web application in
> VS2005 works on the same principle. It has the advantage of being
> simpler to deploy and update. In addition to the project folder it can
> create a website folder in your documents area instead of using
> inetpub/wwwroot (which may not have been installed anyway). In this
> mode VS2005 runs its own web server software using a special port
> number.
>
> Hope that throws some light on it.

Thanks, Stan.  That does help some. But I guess it raises the question
of "WHY???" Why would you want to compile something everytime you run
the web application, instead of compiling it and downloading the DLL?
And it seems to expose you to the possibility of more inconsistencies
if your execution environment is different from your development
envirionment. Like right now I'm having fits because it's trying to
compile the .XSD Dataset definition files on the server that I've
deployed to, and immediately cratering (on line 1) for no apparent
reason, but apparently SOMETHING is different about the compiler or
environment that is running on the server compared to what I built
with.  If I was deploying the .dll , I wouldn't have that problem.