Fog Creek Software
Discussion Board




Welcome! and rules

Joel on Software

anyone use dreamweaver for asp.net dev?

I was just wondering if anyone here uses dreamweaver mx for asp.net development.  Would you say to use VS.net or dreamweaver MX.  My main reason for this is my labtop HD is pretty limited in space and my machine (company supplied) performs pretty sad already, lord knows if it can handle the processing requirements of VS. 

grover
Thursday, October 07, 2004

You could also look at the WebMatrix project, I'm sure that its considerably smaller than VS.NET in terms of disk size.  Still, disk space is cheap these days!!

Kris
Thursday, October 07, 2004

I don't have VS.net. My ASP.net development setup is DreamWeaver for aspx files, a text editor for vb/c#/whatever source files, and the command-line compilers.

I don't reccomend DreamWeaver for ASP.net development, or anything else for that matter. It's just too buggy. First and foremost, on my system it leaks memory every time I switch to a different application. Lots of memory. Several other people at $EMPLOYER have reported the same. Also, Dreamweaver often doesn't save changes which it thinks are unimportant, such as changing the spelling of tags, attributes, and values or replacing & with &. I can't count how many times I've been using DreamWeaver to clean up HTML for validation and had to use a different tool because the text DreamWeaver displayed in source view and the text it saved to disk were different. That's a problem.

Web Matrix has its own problems, such as reformatting your source every time you change views. However, it has a much smaller footprint than DreamWeaver MX and seems to have fewer serious bugs.

All in all, it probably depends on whose Kool-Aid you prefer. If you don't buy into the philosophy that comes with the tool you choose, it's going to hurt.

comp.lang.c refugee
Thursday, October 07, 2004

Also, don't *ever* use DreamWeaver to edit VB source files, C# source files, or any other file type that it doesn't know how to create. Otherwise you could run into some serious data corruption.

comp.lang.c refugee
Thursday, October 07, 2004

*Yuck*

Sounds like DreamWeaver is a nightmare to work with.  If it's not honest with what it saves to disk, I don't know how anyone could develop with it.

.
Friday, October 08, 2004

Like any  such tool, DreamWeaver carries with it a particular design philosophy and way of working. If you buy into that philosophy and work the way the authors of the tool do, you'll be happy. If not, it's a nightmare. In this case, the DreamWeaver philosophy is that it's OK to write HTML that's invalid in ways that most browsers support, and the DreamWeaver way of working is to not edit the HTML directly.

The DreamWeaver developers probably didn't make an explicit decision not to support my way of working, but their biases show through enough that they might as well have. For instance, in addition to the problems I've mentioned, it's not possible to construct a valid (per W3C standards) HTML document which passes validation in DreamWeaver MX. Among other things, the DreamWeaver validator insists on the presence of certain proprietary (if widely supported) attributes.

To answer the implicit question in your posts, an awful lot of people use and prefer DreamWeaver because the tool fits the way they work and because the people who made the tool have a design philosophy which is similar to theirs. IME most such people have a background in graphic design and are relatively unfamiliar with the web at a nuts-and-bolts level.

As for me, I'll just use my text editor. I don't need my tools telling me how to work.

comp.lang.c refugee
Monday, October 11, 2004

*  Recent Topics

*  Fog Creek Home