Difference between ASP.NET Website and ASP.NET Application Project

What, from a high level point of view, is the difference (in Visual
Studio 2005) between Website (accessed with Open Website or Create
Website from the StartPage) that is an ASP.NET Website, and a Project
that is created with the "ASP.NET Application" template?

I see some obvious differences: the Project creates the working folder
under the Visual Studio 2005\Projects directory, while the Website
creates it in the Inetpub\wwwroot directory. And there are some more
subtle differences that I don't understand as well. The project
creates some .cs (in C#) files for a lot of the things that the
website does not (e.g., in the Website, there is no .cs file generated
for DataSets (.xsd files), and theres no .designer.cs file
generated for pages). The project uses different namespace
definitions for the same files in the same relative directory
positions. And it seems that some of the web administration tools (the
whole Website menu, including "Copy Web") is missing when you're
working with a project. Also, it appears (I'm not sure) that the
compiled code for the website is never stored (it seems to be being
regenerated on the fly when I access the website.)

I see these differences, but I don't understand why they're there or
to what purpose they are there. Can someone explain it to me?

Thanks.

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

On 17 Apr, 18:41, daveh551 wrote:
> What, from a high level point of view, is the difference (in Visual
> Studio 2005) between Website (accessed with Open Website or Create
> Website from the StartPage) that is an ASP.NET Website, and a Project
> that is created with =A0the "ASP.NET Application" template?
>
> I see some obvious differences: the Project creates the working folder
> under the Visual Studio 2005\Projects directory, while the Website
> creates it in the Inetpub\wwwroot directory. And there are some more
> subtle differences that I don't understand as well. =A0The project
> creates some .cs (in C#) files for a lot of the things that the
> website does not (e.g., in the Website, there is no .cs file generated
> for DataSets (.xsd files), and theres no .designer.cs file
> generated for pages). =A0The project uses different namespace
> definitions for the same files in the same relative directory
> positions. And it seems that some of the web administration tools (the
> whole Website menu, including "Copy Web") is missing when you're
> working with a project. =A0Also, it appears (I'm not sure) that the
> compiled code for the website is never stored (it seems to be being
> regenerated on the fly when I access the website.)
>
> I see these differences, but I don't understand why they're there or
> to what purpose they are there. Can someone explain it to me?
>
> Thanks.

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.

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

On Apr 17, 6:38 pm, Stan wrote:
> On 17 Apr, 18:41, daveh551 wrote:
>
>
>
> > What, from a high level point of view, is the difference (in Visual
> > Studio 2005) between Website (accessed with Open Website or Create
> > Website from the StartPage) that is an ASP.NET Website, and a Project
> > that is created with the "ASP.NET Application" template?
>
> > I see some obvious differences: the Project creates the working folder
> > under the Visual Studio 2005\Projects directory, while the Website
> > creates it in the Inetpub\wwwroot directory. And there are some more
> > subtle differences that I don't understand as well. The project
> > creates some .cs (in C#) files for a lot of the things that the
> > website does not (e.g., in the Website, there is no .cs file generated
> > for DataSets (.xsd files), and theres no .designer.cs file
> > generated for pages). The project uses different namespace
> > definitions for the same files in the same relative directory
> > positions. And it seems that some of the web administration tools (the
> > whole Website menu, including "Copy Web") is missing when you're
> > working with a project. Also, it appears (I'm not sure) that the
> > compiled code for the website is never stored (it seems to be being
> > regenerated on the fly when I access the website.)
>
> > I see these differences, but I don't understand why they're there or
> > to what purpose they are there. Can someone explain it to me?
>
> > Thanks.
>
> 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.

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

On 18 Apr, 05:28, daveh551 wrote:
> On Apr 17, 6:38 pm, Stan wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 17 Apr, 18:41, daveh551 wrote:
>
> > > What, from a high level point of view, is the difference (in Visual
> > > Studio 2005) between Website (accessed with Open Website or Create
> > > Website from the StartPage) that is an ASP.NET Website, and a Project
> > > that is created with =A0the "ASP.NET Application" template?
>
> > > I see some obvious differences: the Project creates the working folder=

> > > under the Visual Studio 2005\Projects directory, while the Website
> > > creates it in the Inetpub\wwwroot directory. And there are some more
> > > subtle differences that I don't understand as well. =A0The project
> > > creates some .cs (in C#) files for a lot of the things that the
> > > website does not (e.g., in the Website, there is no .cs file generated=

> > > for DataSets (.xsd files), and theres no .designer.cs file
> > > generated for pages). =A0The project uses different namespace
> > > definitions for the same files in the same relative directory
> > > positions. And it seems that some of the web administration tools (the=

> > > whole Website menu, including "Copy Web") is missing when you're
> > > working with a project. =A0Also, it appears (I'm not sure) that the
> > > compiled code for the website is never stored (it seems to be being
> > > regenerated on the fly when I access the website.)
>
> > > I see these differences, but I don't understand why they're there or
> > > to what purpose they are there. Can someone explain it to me?
>
> > > Thanks.
>
> > 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. =A0That 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. =A0If I was deploying the .dll , I wouldn't have that problem.- Hide=
quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The DLL file does not contain code that can be executed directly by
the Server processor. It's an intermediate language that saves time
parsing the source code from scratch. Issues due to compiler version
differences might still arise.

However if you suspect that then try using the option of "publishing"
the web site which will create a DLL out of the .cs and other files.

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

On Apr 18, 2:56 am, Stan wrote:
> On 18 Apr, 05:28, daveh551 wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 17, 6:38 pm, Stan wrote:
>
> > > On 17 Apr, 18:41, daveh551 wrote:
>
> > > > What, from a high level point of view, is the difference (in Visual
> > > > Studio 2005) between Website (accessed with Open Website or Create
> > > > Website from the StartPage) that is an ASP.NET Website, and a Project
> > > > that is created with the "ASP.NET Application" template?
>
> > > > I see some obvious differences: the Project creates the working folder
> > > > under the Visual Studio 2005\Projects directory, while the Website
> > > > creates it in the Inetpub\wwwroot directory. And there are some more
> > > > subtle differences that I don't understand as well. The project
> > > > creates some .cs (in C#) files for a lot of the things that the
> > > > website does not (e.g., in the Website, there is no .cs file generated
> > > > for DataSets (.xsd files), and theres no .designer.cs file
> > > > generated for pages). The project uses different namespace
> > > > definitions for the same files in the same relative directory
> > > > positions. And it seems that some of the web administration tools (the
> > > > whole Website menu, including "Copy Web") is missing when you're
> > > > working with a project. Also, it appears (I'm not sure) that the
> > > > compiled code for the website is never stored (it seems to be being
> > > > regenerated on the fly when I access the website.)
>
> > > > I see these differences, but I don't understand why they're there or
> > > > to what purpose they are there. Can someone explain it to me?
>
> > > > Thanks.
>
> > > 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.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> The DLL file does not contain code that can be executed directly by
> the Server processor. It's an intermediate language that saves time
> parsing the source code from scratch. Issues due to compiler version
> differences might still arise.
>
> However if you suspect that then try using the option of "publishing"
> the web site which will create a DLL out of the .cs and other files.

THANK YOU, Thank you, thank you, Stan. Publishing solved my parser
error problem. And MOST everything seems to be working now EXCEPT for
one critical thing. My login page (which, of course, is critical to
the guts of the site!) blows up with this error:

Compilation Error
Description: An error occurred during the compilation of a resource
required to service this request. Please review the following specific
error details and modify your source code appropriately.

Compiler Error Message: CS0030: Cannot convert type 'ASP.login_aspx'
to 'System.Web.UI.WebControls.Login'

Source Error:

[No relevant source lines]


Here is the .aspx file for that page:

<%@ page language="C#" masterpagefile="~/TakeCharge.master"
autoeventwireup="true" inherits="Login, App_Web_8mstyslz"
title="Login" %>
Runat="Server">

Login now to create, revise, or view your plan.

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

On Apr 18, 2:56 am, Stan wrote:
> On 18 Apr, 05:28, daveh551 wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Apr 17, 6:38 pm, Stan wrote:
>
> > > On 17 Apr, 18:41, daveh551 wrote:
>
> > > > What, from a high level point of view, is the difference (in Visual
> > > > Studio 2005) between Website (accessed with Open Website or Create
> > > > Website from the StartPage) that is an ASP.NET Website, and a Project
> > > > that is created with the "ASP.NET Application" template?
>
> > > > I see some obvious differences: the Project creates the working folder
> > > > under the Visual Studio 2005\Projects directory, while the Website
> > > > creates it in the Inetpub\wwwroot directory. And there are some more
> > > > subtle differences that I don't understand as well. The project
> > > > creates some .cs (in C#) files for a lot of the things that the
> > > > website does not (e.g., in the Website, there is no .cs file generated
> > > > for DataSets (.xsd files), and theres no .designer.cs file
> > > > generated for pages). The project uses different namespace
> > > > definitions for the same files in the same relative directory
> > > > positions. And it seems that some of the web administration tools (the
> > > > whole Website menu, including "Copy Web") is missing when you're
> > > > working with a project. Also, it appears (I'm not sure) that the
> > > > compiled code for the website is never stored (it seems to be being
> > > > regenerated on the fly when I access the website.)
>
> > > > I see these differences, but I don't understand why they're there or
> > > > to what purpose they are there. Can someone explain it to me?
>
> > > > Thanks.
>
> > > 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.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> The DLL file does not contain code that can be executed directly by
> the Server processor. It's an intermediate language that saves time
> parsing the source code from scratch. Issues due to compiler version
> differences might still arise.
>
> However if you suspect that then try using the option of "publishing"
> the web site which will create a DLL out of the .cs and other files.

Stan, I thought I had replied already thanking you for your help.
Publishing gets me over the hurdle of the parser error in the XSD
file. It generated a strange compilation error though. The login
page bombed out, saying it couldn't convert type ASP.login_aspx to
System.Web.UI.Controls.Login. I don't get that error when I run (even
the precompiled version) on my local server, but I figured out that it
seems to have to do with having a page named (and therefore a class
named) the same as one of the controls, namely Login (the page) and
Login (the control). This is rather strange since it's my
understanding that "Login.aspx" is the default and accepted name for
the login page used by forms authentication. But I was able to work
around it by creating a new page called "LoginPage.aspx", and
redirecting the forms authentication there.

Now it's just getting a security exception when it (apparently) tries
to open the Config file, but we're getting way outside the original
scope of this thread.

Again, thank you for your help.