n-layer approach

Discussion in 'ASP .Net' started by Dotnet, Mar 4, 2007.

  1. Dotnet

    Dotnet Guest

    I want to so the "right thing". But first, I have a confession to make.
    I've built a few ASP.NET sites now (Version 2.0), and they all work fine.
    However, I have (and here's the confession) used the SqlDataSource in each
    one of them.

    I've read a number of blogs and articles that tell me this is just, well,
    sinful. I have to adopt an n-layer/tier approach which makes use of a Data
    Access Layer and a Business Logic Layer. I've researched this, and to me it
    seems like a whole load of extra work for nothing.

    The kind of sites I build are generally online magazines and web sites for
    small to medium sized companies. I am not interested in getting involved in
    "enterprise" applications, and I work on my own, so I don't have to worry
    about cubicled specialists needing to work on bits of the web site in
    isolation. Also, these sites will never change database, nor require a
    windows form front-end. If any of them get 20,000 page impressions a month,
    the owner will be well pleased. (Actually, one of them gets 1,000,000 a
    year).

    One of the sites was a migration from classic ASP, and resulted in a 90%
    reduction in the number of lines of code. To me, this seems like a 90%
    reduction in the likelihood of bugs, but then, I admit to missing the point.

    If I were the cynical type, I might find myself thinking that the scorn
    poured on the SqlDataSource in certain quarters is a result of fear. Using
    it, I can build a site in a quarter of the time that it took me to build
    something similar using classic ASP, and it's, ermmm... pretty simple to do.
    I can see that it's simplicity will allow a whole load of people to build
    sites commercially, who may not have found it so easy with scripting or
    ASP.NET 1.x, which means the web development market will become more
    competitive.

    However, I don't consider myself cynical, and therefore must be missing
    something important. Can anyone tell me what it is? Why should I be
    adopting an n-layer approach?

    Thanks

    Mike
     
    Dotnet, Mar 4, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Hi

    There are many reasons why you should use nTier
    Applcations , But not all of them relate to "Enterprise Application"
    and "Server Load" but to simple down to earth bug solving
    and seperation of resources for code reuse.
    lets go with these two examples:

    1. example one is like the question why use Stored Procedured
    or why even use Sql2005-Express and not access. and the answer is simple :
    a) so I can devide my work so one person whould work and help me in the
    design of the database without beeing dependent of him , b) if theres a bug
    with the SP , we know that it's a SP problem with small or no effort.

    2. Code reuse , you say you write many web sites , I guess that most of them
    have "tblArticle" and "tblForum" and on and on, or in short , just like the
    "BeerHouse" example has many usefull modules that you can be reuse . the same
    is in your applications , meny modules you write so many times . and you know
    by heart , wouldn't it be simpler to reuse the security component or the
    forum component..... and many more .

    .... are these two good enough examples of non enterprise related samples
    which can drive you to re-think about all of this ?

    -------------------------------------------
    ×× ×ª×©×•×‘×” זו עזרה לך, ×× × ×”×¦×‘×¢ "כן"

    If my answer helped you please press "Yes" bellow

    Adlai Maschiach
    http://blogs.microsoft.co.il/blogs/adlaim/


    "Dotnet" wrote:

    > I want to so the "right thing". But first, I have a confession to make.
    > I've built a few ASP.NET sites now (Version 2.0), and they all work fine.
    > However, I have (and here's the confession) used the SqlDataSource in each
    > one of them.
    >
    > I've read a number of blogs and articles that tell me this is just, well,
    > sinful. I have to adopt an n-layer/tier approach which makes use of a Data
    > Access Layer and a Business Logic Layer. I've researched this, and to me it
    > seems like a whole load of extra work for nothing.
    >
    > The kind of sites I build are generally online magazines and web sites for
    > small to medium sized companies. I am not interested in getting involved in
    > "enterprise" applications, and I work on my own, so I don't have to worry
    > about cubicled specialists needing to work on bits of the web site in
    > isolation. Also, these sites will never change database, nor require a
    > windows form front-end. If any of them get 20,000 page impressions a month,
    > the owner will be well pleased. (Actually, one of them gets 1,000,000 a
    > year).
    >
    > One of the sites was a migration from classic ASP, and resulted in a 90%
    > reduction in the number of lines of code. To me, this seems like a 90%
    > reduction in the likelihood of bugs, but then, I admit to missing the point.
    >
    > If I were the cynical type, I might find myself thinking that the scorn
    > poured on the SqlDataSource in certain quarters is a result of fear. Using
    > it, I can build a site in a quarter of the time that it took me to build
    > something similar using classic ASP, and it's, ermmm... pretty simple to do.
    > I can see that it's simplicity will allow a whole load of people to build
    > sites commercially, who may not have found it so easy with scripting or
    > ASP.NET 1.x, which means the web development market will become more
    > competitive.
    >
    > However, I don't consider myself cynical, and therefore must be missing
    > something important. Can anyone tell me what it is? Why should I be
    > adopting an n-layer approach?
    >
    > Thanks
    >
    > Mike
    >
    >
    >
     
    =?Utf-8?B?QWRsYWkgTWFzY2hpYWNo?=, Mar 5, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Dotnet

    Dotnet Guest

    Not enough reason for me to re-think yet. I use SPs exclusively, because I
    don't like seeing all the SQL in my pages, and I work on my own. I shall
    investigate the Beerhouse sample, but reuse surely means forcing the next
    development to adopt/inherit the objects and properties of the previous one?
    What if they are not compatible? Do I just keep adding methods and
    properties to an object so that I can cover all eventualities? Or do I add
    extra levels in by using a base object and then create my own that inherits
    from it each time?

    I don't use any code generation tools, and a significant part of any
    development for me is creating all the stored procedures. n-layer won't help
    me there, will it? All it does is give me a whole load of objects to code
    too? I still don't get the point.

    Are there server-load issues in relation to the SqlDataSource?



    "Adlai Maschiach" <> wrote in
    message news:...
    > Hi
    >
    > There are many reasons why you should use nTier
    > Applcations , But not all of them relate to "Enterprise Application"
    > and "Server Load" but to simple down to earth bug solving
    > and seperation of resources for code reuse.
    > lets go with these two examples:
    >
    > 1. example one is like the question why use Stored Procedured
    > or why even use Sql2005-Express and not access. and the answer is simple :
    > a) so I can devide my work so one person whould work and help me in the
    > design of the database without beeing dependent of him , b) if theres a
    > bug
    > with the SP , we know that it's a SP problem with small or no effort.
    >
    > 2. Code reuse , you say you write many web sites , I guess that most of
    > them
    > have "tblArticle" and "tblForum" and on and on, or in short , just like
    > the
    > "BeerHouse" example has many usefull modules that you can be reuse . the
    > same
    > is in your applications , meny modules you write so many times . and you
    > know
    > by heart , wouldn't it be simpler to reuse the security component or the
    > forum component..... and many more .
    >
    > ... are these two good enough examples of non enterprise related samples
    > which can drive you to re-think about all of this ?
    >
    > -------------------------------------------
    > ?? ????? ?? ???? ??, ??? ???? "??"
    >
    > If my answer helped you please press "Yes" bellow
    >
    > Adlai Maschiach
    > http://blogs.microsoft.co.il/blogs/adlaim/
    >
    >
    > "Dotnet" wrote:
    >
    >> I want to so the "right thing". But first, I have a confession to make.
    >> I've built a few ASP.NET sites now (Version 2.0), and they all work fine.
    >> However, I have (and here's the confession) used the SqlDataSource in
    >> each
    >> one of them.
    >>
    >> I've read a number of blogs and articles that tell me this is just, well,
    >> sinful. I have to adopt an n-layer/tier approach which makes use of a
    >> Data
    >> Access Layer and a Business Logic Layer. I've researched this, and to me
    >> it
    >> seems like a whole load of extra work for nothing.
    >>
    >> The kind of sites I build are generally online magazines and web sites
    >> for
    >> small to medium sized companies. I am not interested in getting involved
    >> in
    >> "enterprise" applications, and I work on my own, so I don't have to worry
    >> about cubicled specialists needing to work on bits of the web site in
    >> isolation. Also, these sites will never change database, nor require a
    >> windows form front-end. If any of them get 20,000 page impressions a
    >> month,
    >> the owner will be well pleased. (Actually, one of them gets 1,000,000 a
    >> year).
    >>
    >> One of the sites was a migration from classic ASP, and resulted in a 90%
    >> reduction in the number of lines of code. To me, this seems like a 90%
    >> reduction in the likelihood of bugs, but then, I admit to missing the
    >> point.
    >>
    >> If I were the cynical type, I might find myself thinking that the scorn
    >> poured on the SqlDataSource in certain quarters is a result of fear.
    >> Using
    >> it, I can build a site in a quarter of the time that it took me to build
    >> something similar using classic ASP, and it's, ermmm... pretty simple to
    >> do.
    >> I can see that it's simplicity will allow a whole load of people to build
    >> sites commercially, who may not have found it so easy with scripting or
    >> ASP.NET 1.x, which means the web development market will become more
    >> competitive.
    >>
    >> However, I don't consider myself cynical, and therefore must be missing
    >> something important. Can anyone tell me what it is? Why should I be
    >> adopting an n-layer approach?
    >>
    >> Thanks
    >>
    >> Mike
    >>
    >>
    >>
     
    Dotnet, Mar 5, 2007
    #3
  4. Dotnet

    Aidy Guest

    > The kind of sites I build are generally online magazines and web sites for
    > small to medium sized companies. I am not interested in getting involved
    > in "enterprise" applications, and I work on my own, so I don't have to
    > worry about cubicled specialists needing to work on bits of the web site
    > in isolation.


    If you don't need an n-tier approach then don't use one. There is no point
    using technology for technology's sake. The one thing I will say about the
    SqlDataSource is that you're applications are not strongly typed, which is
    one of the corners of .net development.
     
    Aidy, Mar 5, 2007
    #4
  5. "Aidy" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:...
    > If you don't need an n-tier approach then don't use one. There is no
    > point using technology for technology's sake. The one thing I will say
    > about the SqlDataSource is that you're applications are not strongly
    > typed, which is one of the corners of .net development.
    >

    I agree.

    As long as your applications don't deal with sensitive data, there's no
    reason why you should get too sophisticated. There is no, "One size fits
    all" in application development.


    Peter
     
    Peter Bradley, Mar 5, 2007
    #5
  6. Dotnet

    Dotnet Guest

    "Aidy" <> wrote in message
    news:eek:...
    >> The kind of sites I build are generally online magazines and web sites
    >> for small to medium sized companies. I am not interested in getting
    >> involved in "enterprise" applications, and I work on my own, so I don't
    >> have to worry about cubicled specialists needing to work on bits of the
    >> web site in isolation.

    >
    > If you don't need an n-tier approach then don't use one. There is no
    > point using technology for technology's sake. The one thing I will say
    > about the SqlDataSource is that you're applications are not strongly
    > typed, which is one of the corners of .net development.


    I should point out that one of my faults/problems is a lack of OOP
    knowledge. Is it relatively easy for you to explain what the practical
    implications of my applications not being strongly typed are (or point me to
    references that will do so), and why did Microsoft introduce a component
    that would allow (encourage) this if it is serious?

    Thanks
    Mike
     
    Dotnet, Mar 5, 2007
    #6
  7. Dotnet

    Aidy Guest

    > why did Microsoft introduce a component that would allow (encourage) this
    > if it is serious?


    I could do a website and not right a single line of code. I can drag
    connections, tables etc on the form and have wizards do all my code. If you
    don't want to learn how to code it is better than nothing....but the
    resultant application won't be very robust or scalable. You can use
    SqlDataSources to cut out a lot of the actual coding, but that doesn't mean
    your solution is the "best" it can be. MS have just given you a range of
    tools to use and you decide which one is best for you. If binding typeless
    data direct to your controls is fine for you then fair enough. For people
    who want strongly typed data it isn't fine.
     
    Aidy, Mar 5, 2007
    #7
  8. Heh! Strong typing isn't just an OOP thing. C is strongly typed.

    What is your programming background? It might give some hints as to what
    you might need to know. Generally, however, strong typing is used to ensure
    that programmers only put into an object, what that object is supposed to
    hold (e.g. you can't store a float in an int variable - unless the language
    provides some form of implicit cast). The idea is that this cuts out a lot
    of mistakes that would otherwise be made, by catching them at compile time.


    Peter

    "Dotnet" <> wrote in message
    news:u67$...
    >
    > "Aidy" <> wrote in message
    > news:eek:...
    >>> The kind of sites I build are generally online magazines and web sites
    >>> for small to medium sized companies. I am not interested in getting
    >>> involved in "enterprise" applications, and I work on my own, so I don't
    >>> have to worry about cubicled specialists needing to work on bits of the
    >>> web site in isolation.

    >>
    >> If you don't need an n-tier approach then don't use one. There is no
    >> point using technology for technology's sake. The one thing I will say
    >> about the SqlDataSource is that you're applications are not strongly
    >> typed, which is one of the corners of .net development.

    >
    > I should point out that one of my faults/problems is a lack of OOP
    > knowledge. Is it relatively easy for you to explain what the practical
    > implications of my applications not being strongly typed are (or point me
    > to references that will do so), and why did Microsoft introduce a
    > component that would allow (encourage) this if it is serious?
    >
    > Thanks
    > Mike
    >
     
    Peter Bradley, Mar 5, 2007
    #8
  9. Dotnet

    Dotnet Guest

    VBScript with classic ASP. All variants....

    "Peter Bradley" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Heh! Strong typing isn't just an OOP thing. C is strongly typed.
    >
    > What is your programming background? It might give some hints as to what
    > you might need to know. Generally, however, strong typing is used to
    > ensure that programmers only put into an object, what that object is
    > supposed to hold (e.g. you can't store a float in an int variable - unless
    > the language provides some form of implicit cast). The idea is that this
    > cuts out a lot of mistakes that would otherwise be made, by catching them
    > at compile time.
    >
    >
    > Peter
    >
    > "Dotnet" <> wrote in message
    > news:u67$...
    >>
    >> "Aidy" <> wrote in message
    >> news:eek:...
    >>>> The kind of sites I build are generally online magazines and web sites
    >>>> for small to medium sized companies. I am not interested in getting
    >>>> involved in "enterprise" applications, and I work on my own, so I don't
    >>>> have to worry about cubicled specialists needing to work on bits of the
    >>>> web site in isolation.
    >>>
    >>> If you don't need an n-tier approach then don't use one. There is no
    >>> point using technology for technology's sake. The one thing I will say
    >>> about the SqlDataSource is that you're applications are not strongly
    >>> typed, which is one of the corners of .net development.

    >>
    >> I should point out that one of my faults/problems is a lack of OOP
    >> knowledge. Is it relatively easy for you to explain what the practical
    >> implications of my applications not being strongly typed are (or point me
    >> to references that will do so), and why did Microsoft introduce a
    >> component that would allow (encourage) this if it is serious?
    >>
    >> Thanks
    >> Mike
    >>

    >
    >
     
    Dotnet, Mar 5, 2007
    #9
  10. Dotnet

    Aidy Guest

    > All variants....

    Explains it all :D

    What you're basically doing is doing ASP.net the ASP way. Quite common
    really, but not the best way.
     
    Aidy, Mar 5, 2007
    #10
  11. Dotnet

    cowznofsky Guest

    On Mar 5, 3:15 am, Adlai Maschiach
    <> wrote:
    > Hi
    >
    > There are many reasons why you should use nTier
    > Applcations , But not all of them relate to "Enterprise Application"
    > and "Server Load" but to simple down to earth bug solving
    > and seperation of resources for code reuse.
    > lets go with these two examples:
    >
    > 1. example one is like the question why use Stored Procedured
    > or why even use Sql2005-Express and not access. and the answer is simple :
    > a) so I can devide my work so one person whould work and help me in the
    > design of the database without beeing dependent of him , b) if theres a bug
    > with the SP , we know that it's a SP problem with small or no effort.
    >
    > 2. Code reuse , you say you write many web sites , I guess that most of them
    > have "tblArticle" and "tblForum" and on and on, or in short , just like the
    > "BeerHouse" example has many usefull modules that you can be reuse . the same
    > is in your applications , meny modules you write so many times . and you know
    > by heart , wouldn't it be simpler to reuse the security component or the
    > forum component..... and many more .
    >
    > ... are these two good enough examples of non enterprise related samples
    > which can drive you to re-think about all of this ?
    >
    > -------------------------------------------
    > ×× ×ª×©×•×‘×” זו עזרה לך, ×× × ×”×¦×‘×¢ "כן"
    >
    > If my answer helped you please press "Yes" bellow
    >
    > Adlai Maschiachhttp://blogs.microsoft.co.il/blogs/adlaim/
    >
    > "Dotnet" wrote:
    > > I want to so the "right thing". But first, I have a confession to make.
    > > I've built a few ASP.NET sites now (Version 2.0), and they all work fine.
    > > However, I have (and here's the confession) used the SqlDataSource in each
    > > one of them.

    >
    > > I've read a number of blogs and articles that tell me this is just, well,
    > > sinful. I have to adopt an n-layer/tier approach which makes use of a Data
    > > Access Layer and a Business Logic Layer. I've researched this, and to me it
    > > seems like a whole load of extra work for nothing.

    >
    > > The kind of sites I build are generally online magazines and web sites for
    > > small to medium sized companies. I am not interested in getting involved in
    > > "enterprise" applications, and I work on my own, so I don't have to worry
    > > about cubicled specialists needing to work on bits of the web site in
    > > isolation. Also, these sites will never change database, nor require a
    > > windows form front-end. If any of them get 20,000 page impressions a month,
    > > the owner will be well pleased. (Actually, one of them gets 1,000,000 a
    > > year).

    >
    > > One of the sites was a migration from classic ASP, and resulted in a 90%
    > > reduction in the number of lines of code. To me, this seems like a 90%
    > > reduction in the likelihood of bugs, but then, I admit to missing the point.

    >
    > > If I were the cynical type, I might find myself thinking that the scorn
    > > poured on the SqlDataSource in certain quarters is a result of fear. Using
    > > it, I can build a site in a quarter of the time that it took me to build
    > > something similar using classic ASP, and it's, ermmm... pretty simple to do.
    > > I can see that it's simplicity will allow a whole load of people to build
    > > sites commercially, who may not have found it so easy with scripting or
    > > ASP.NET 1.x, which means the web development market will become more
    > > competitive.

    >
    > > However, I don't consider myself cynical, and therefore must be missing
    > > something important. Can anyone tell me what it is? Why should I be
    > > adopting an n-layer approach?

    >
    > > Thanks

    >
    > > Mike


    Just to add to the confusion, I recently attended an MS workshop on
    Windows Forms Technologies. There is nothing at all mentioned about
    an n-layer approach. The use of controls such as the SQLDataSource is
    noted as 'Best Practice'.
    I can't understand this at all, since this is in direct contradiction
    to the multi-tiered approach that MS has been pushing in other media
    for years.

    These controls are often used in MS presentations: "Look, I just
    created an application in 10 seconds!". These controls also find
    their way into the books that are written to coincide with new
    releases. The result is a lot of wasted time on the part of
    developers who try these things and then realize later that they would
    have been better off if they had used code rather than these data
    access controls.

    Some of the "scorn poured on the SQLDataSource", is no doubt from
    developers who have been burned before.
     
    cowznofsky, Mar 5, 2007
    #11
  12. Dotnet

    Dotnet Guest

    "Aidy" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >> All variants....

    >
    > Explains it all :D
    >
    > What you're basically doing is doing ASP.net the ASP way. Quite common
    > really, but not the best way.


    And that says it all. I am still none the wiser for your contribution.
     
    Dotnet, Mar 5, 2007
    #12
  13. Dotnet

    sloan Guest

    Here is another way to phrase it.

    RAPID DEVELOPMENT is not the same as GOOD and Maintainable Development.

    The little tools, SqlDataSource , etc ,etc are for rapid development.

    Good development is something else altogether.

    The layers help make your code reusable and maintainable.

    And you have options for future scaleability.


    The cost of software isn't in the devlopment, its in the maintenance.

    Layered software really helps with the debugging process.




    6/5/2006
    Custom Objects and Tiered Development II // 2.0

    5/24/2006
    Custom Objects/Collections and Tiered Development

    http://sholliday.spaces.live.com/blog/




    "Dotnet" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > I want to so the "right thing". But first, I have a confession to make.
    > I've built a few ASP.NET sites now (Version 2.0), and they all work fine.
    > However, I have (and here's the confession) used the SqlDataSource in each
    > one of them.
    >
    > I've read a number of blogs and articles that tell me this is just, well,
    > sinful. I have to adopt an n-layer/tier approach which makes use of a

    Data
    > Access Layer and a Business Logic Layer. I've researched this, and to me

    it
    > seems like a whole load of extra work for nothing.
    >
    > The kind of sites I build are generally online magazines and web sites for
    > small to medium sized companies. I am not interested in getting involved

    in
    > "enterprise" applications, and I work on my own, so I don't have to worry
    > about cubicled specialists needing to work on bits of the web site in
    > isolation. Also, these sites will never change database, nor require a
    > windows form front-end. If any of them get 20,000 page impressions a

    month,
    > the owner will be well pleased. (Actually, one of them gets 1,000,000 a
    > year).
    >
    > One of the sites was a migration from classic ASP, and resulted in a 90%
    > reduction in the number of lines of code. To me, this seems like a 90%
    > reduction in the likelihood of bugs, but then, I admit to missing the

    point.
    >
    > If I were the cynical type, I might find myself thinking that the scorn
    > poured on the SqlDataSource in certain quarters is a result of fear.

    Using
    > it, I can build a site in a quarter of the time that it took me to build
    > something similar using classic ASP, and it's, ermmm... pretty simple to

    do.
    > I can see that it's simplicity will allow a whole load of people to build
    > sites commercially, who may not have found it so easy with scripting or
    > ASP.NET 1.x, which means the web development market will become more
    > competitive.
    >
    > However, I don't consider myself cynical, and therefore must be missing
    > something important. Can anyone tell me what it is? Why should I be
    > adopting an n-layer approach?
    >
    > Thanks
    >
    > Mike
    >
    >
     
    sloan, Mar 5, 2007
    #13
  14. <rant>
    Because they're selling to the PHBs who think that coding, "Is all
    drag-and-drop these days". People like you, on the other hand, pick up that
    what they're saying is self-contradictory nonsense.

    Be-suited CTOs are apparently incapable of realising that solving difficult
    problems is difficult. No amount of drag-and-drop can make it easy. But
    all they can see is "applications ready for shipment in a matter of hours".
    The fact that these applications are barely functional, flakey, insecure and
    bloated - never mind the fact that much of the code is now hidden from
    view - hardly makes it onto their radar.

    It's like the use of tools to write HTML. Tools write dreadful HTML (never
    mind XHTML). Every one of them. Including Dreamweaver. But will your boss
    believe you that it's easier to hand code your pages? Oh dear no! So you
    have to use the idiot tool he bought licenses for without consulting the
    people who do the work, and then spend days de-moronising HTML pages. Then
    he wonders why the project's late.

    They swallow Microsoft's latest Kool-Aid and the poor practitioners are left
    to pick up the pieces. The only winner in all this is, guess who? Correct.
    Microsoft, who've sold another vapour-ware license for many times its worth.
    </rant>

    Peter

    "cowznofsky" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    On Mar 5, 3:15 am, Adlai Maschiach
    <> wrote:

    Just to add to the confusion, I recently attended an MS workshop on
    Windows Forms Technologies. There is nothing at all mentioned about
    an n-layer approach. The use of controls such as the SQLDataSource is
    noted as 'Best Practice'.
    I can't understand this at all, since this is in direct contradiction
    to the multi-tiered approach that MS has been pushing in other media
    for years.

    These controls are often used in MS presentations: "Look, I just
    created an application in 10 seconds!". These controls also find
    their way into the books that are written to coincide with new
    releases. The result is a lot of wasted time on the part of
    developers who try these things and then realize later that they would
    have been better off if they had used code rather than these data
    access controls.

    Some of the "scorn poured on the SQLDataSource", is no doubt from
    developers who have been burned before.
     
    Peter Bradley, Mar 6, 2007
    #14
  15. I think what he's saying (although not very kindly IMHO) is that you could
    do with spending some time looking at some of the theories behind
    programming in general, and good programming practices in particular. This
    is not knowledge that one finds, usually, amongst people with your
    programming background. In fact, many people would argue that the scripting
    languages you mention mitigate against good programming practice.

    This group can't supply you with a background knowledge of programming
    theory and practice. You need to sit down with a few good books for that.
    This one might do for a start:

    http://www.compman.co.uk/scripts/browse.asp?ref=783974

    (Since you're interested in an OO language, you'd might as well learn the
    theory behind it)

    Once you've got some basic background, you might like to look at books on
    patterns and practices. Like this for example:

    http://www.compman.co.uk/scripts/browse.asp?ref=801797

    (Since you're intersted in an MS product, you'd might as well read MS' book)

    Remember that most of us came by this knowledge through hard work. We're
    happy to pass on the hints and tips that we picked up along the way, but a
    newsgroup is not the place for a tutorial. For that you must either read
    books or join a course. This is not trying to be unkind. It's just that
    without a basic level of background knowledge, you aren't going to
    understand what we say. We need to have a common vocabulary with you for us
    to communicate and for you to understand.

    What I'm suggesting is that you need to spend some time learning that
    vocabulary. I'm sure you'll find it rewarding. I did.

    Best of luck and HTH


    Peter



    "Dotnet" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > "Aidy" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>> All variants....

    >>
    >> Explains it all :D
    >>
    >> What you're basically doing is doing ASP.net the ASP way. Quite common
    >> really, but not the best way.

    >
    > And that says it all. I am still none the wiser for your contribution.
    >
    >
    >
     
    Peter Bradley, Mar 6, 2007
    #15
  16. Dotnet

    Dotnet Guest

    Thank you Peter.

    Incidentally, I have had no formal training in any kind of programming. As I
    said in my OP - I want to "do the right thing". I learnt ASP with VBScript
    in my own time through hard work, and became very conscious of doing it as
    well as possible. I'm going through the same process with ASP.NET. There
    is so much to learn, and as cowznofsky pointed out, so much contradictory
    stuff, I thought I'd come here and get a little help on focusing my
    attention in the right areas, and trying to identify the red herrings.

    Mike




    "Peter Bradley" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I think what he's saying (although not very kindly IMHO) is that you could
    >do with spending some time looking at some of the theories behind
    >programming in general, and good programming practices in particular. This
    >is not knowledge that one finds, usually, amongst people with your
    >programming background. In fact, many people would argue that the
    >scripting languages you mention mitigate against good programming practice.
    >
    > This group can't supply you with a background knowledge of programming
    > theory and practice. You need to sit down with a few good books for that.
    > This one might do for a start:
    >
    > http://www.compman.co.uk/scripts/browse.asp?ref=783974
    >
    > (Since you're interested in an OO language, you'd might as well learn the
    > theory behind it)
    >
    > Once you've got some basic background, you might like to look at books on
    > patterns and practices. Like this for example:
    >
    > http://www.compman.co.uk/scripts/browse.asp?ref=801797
    >
    > (Since you're intersted in an MS product, you'd might as well read MS'
    > book)
    >
    > Remember that most of us came by this knowledge through hard work. We're
    > happy to pass on the hints and tips that we picked up along the way, but a
    > newsgroup is not the place for a tutorial. For that you must either read
    > books or join a course. This is not trying to be unkind. It's just that
    > without a basic level of background knowledge, you aren't going to
    > understand what we say. We need to have a common vocabulary with you for
    > us to communicate and for you to understand.
    >
    > What I'm suggesting is that you need to spend some time learning that
    > vocabulary. I'm sure you'll find it rewarding. I did.
    >
    > Best of luck and HTH
    >
    >
    > Peter
    >
    >
    >
    > "Dotnet" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>
    >> "Aidy" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>>> All variants....
    >>>
    >>> Explains it all :D
    >>>
    >>> What you're basically doing is doing ASP.net the ASP way. Quite common
    >>> really, but not the best way.

    >>
    >> And that says it all. I am still none the wiser for your contribution.
    >>
    >>
    >>

    >
    >
     
    Dotnet, Mar 6, 2007
    #16
  17. Best of luck, Mike. I hope the references I gave give you a start. There's
    also a wealth of tutorial material on the net - but it's of varying quality,
    so I'd not rely on it until you have enough knowledge to judge.

    I came into IT very late in life, and one thing I did was to study night
    school and part-time/distance learning classes. I finished up, somehow,
    with an MSc in IT at Liverpool University. If you're in the UK (or even if
    you're not, come to think of it), you might look at UK Open University
    courses. They do some good stuff on OOA/D/P at both undergraduate and
    post-graduate level. It's Java or Smalltalk based, depending on the course,
    but once you have that background, you'll find C# comes naturally. Java,
    especially, as it's very close to C#. You can just take whatever modules
    you like with the OU. You don't have to study for a degree.

    Remember that there's more to programming than just "getting something
    working". It's a craft: a skill. Good programmers take a pride in a job
    well done: in being able to look at some code and think, "Not many people
    could have done that any better than I have". They worry about
    architecture, good design, security, reusability, performance and many other
    things (like whether to use vi or emacs :)).

    Post again when you need some specific help. The problem with your OP was
    that an answer requires that you understand a fair bit about application
    architecture, design patterns and program security. Until you have that,
    it's hard to answer your query without seeming either rude or patronising.
    But you seem to be a determined guy. You'll probably come back and put our
    problems right.

    Cheers


    Peter


    "Dotnet" <> wrote in message
    news:%...
    > Thank you Peter.
    >
    > Incidentally, I have had no formal training in any kind of programming. As
    > I said in my OP - I want to "do the right thing". I learnt ASP with
    > VBScript in my own time through hard work, and became very conscious of
    > doing it as well as possible. I'm going through the same process with
    > ASP.NET. There is so much to learn, and as cowznofsky pointed out, so
    > much contradictory stuff, I thought I'd come here and get a little help on
    > focusing my attention in the right areas, and trying to identify the red
    > herrings.
    >
    > Mike
    >
    >
    >
    >
    > "Peter Bradley" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >>I think what he's saying (although not very kindly IMHO) is that you could
    >>do with spending some time looking at some of the theories behind
    >>programming in general, and good programming practices in particular.
    >>This is not knowledge that one finds, usually, amongst people with your
    >>programming background. In fact, many people would argue that the
    >>scripting languages you mention mitigate against good programming
    >>practice.
    >>
    >> This group can't supply you with a background knowledge of programming
    >> theory and practice. You need to sit down with a few good books for
    >> that. This one might do for a start:
    >>
    >> http://www.compman.co.uk/scripts/browse.asp?ref=783974
    >>
    >> (Since you're interested in an OO language, you'd might as well learn the
    >> theory behind it)
    >>
    >> Once you've got some basic background, you might like to look at books on
    >> patterns and practices. Like this for example:
    >>
    >> http://www.compman.co.uk/scripts/browse.asp?ref=801797
    >>
    >> (Since you're intersted in an MS product, you'd might as well read MS'
    >> book)
    >>
    >> Remember that most of us came by this knowledge through hard work. We're
    >> happy to pass on the hints and tips that we picked up along the way, but
    >> a newsgroup is not the place for a tutorial. For that you must either
    >> read books or join a course. This is not trying to be unkind. It's just
    >> that without a basic level of background knowledge, you aren't going to
    >> understand what we say. We need to have a common vocabulary with you for
    >> us to communicate and for you to understand.
    >>
    >> What I'm suggesting is that you need to spend some time learning that
    >> vocabulary. I'm sure you'll find it rewarding. I did.
    >>
    >> Best of luck and HTH
    >>
    >>
    >> Peter
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> "Dotnet" <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>>
    >>> "Aidy" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:...
    >>>>> All variants....
    >>>>
    >>>> Explains it all :D
    >>>>
    >>>> What you're basically doing is doing ASP.net the ASP way. Quite common
    >>>> really, but not the best way.
    >>>
    >>> And that says it all. I am still none the wiser for your contribution.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >>

    >
    >
     
    Peter Bradley, Mar 6, 2007
    #17
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. =?Utf-8?B?YzY3NjIyOA==?=

    do it in database layer or application layer

    =?Utf-8?B?YzY3NjIyOA==?=, Jan 26, 2006, in forum: ASP .Net
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    435
    Karl Seguin [MVP]
    Jan 27, 2006
  2. et
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    1,921
  3. dan
    Replies:
    25
    Views:
    1,339
    Uncle Bob (Robert C. Martin)
    Oct 28, 2003
  4. Universe
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    476
    Universe
    Oct 24, 2003
  5. Dhananjay
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    1,127
    sloan
    Dec 18, 2006
Loading...

Share This Page