Visual Studio Rant
I like Visual Studio.Net. It rocks. However...
When I switch between the designer and code view, especially on a html page, I wish it would just leave my code alone. Look, just f**k off. You never work as you are supposed to - if I wanted your help, I wouldn't spend all my time trying to turn you off in the menus. I'd press CTRL+K, D, for example, then you could do something.
Chances of the dev team reading this are almost zero. But still, this is poor. Very poor, but mainly, not because it's bad (although it is), but because it's destructive.
And it p***es me off.
~This post has been heavily edited~
When I switch between the designer and code view, especially on a html page, I wish it would just leave my code alone. Look, just f**k off. You never work as you are supposed to - if I wanted your help, I wouldn't spend all my time trying to turn you off in the menus. I'd press CTRL+K, D, for example, then you could do something.
Chances of the dev team reading this are almost zero. But still, this is poor. Very poor, but mainly, not because it's bad (although it is), but because it's destructive.
And it p***es me off.
~This post has been heavily edited~
posted by dan at
9:17 pm
1 Comments:
I've got to agree with you there Dan. I find that I have abandoned the visual designer pretty much altogether.
For WinForms I will have a dummy UserControl sitting around for getting auto-generated code, which I then copy/paste into the real file, which is the only way to stop VS stuffing things up at some later juncture.
For WebForms I have inherited from System.Web.UI.Page to give me a new base class for my pages. This uses an iherited version HtmlTextWriter in the Render(). My actual pages have to create the right HtmlTextWriter in CreateHtmlTextWriter(). There is no html directly on my aspx pages at all. All the Html fragments etc are written separately and can be accessed from my derived HtmlTextWriter. Works surprisingly well
By
anon, at 8:40 am
Post a Comment
<< Home