That's a good point. Hopefully it isn't too difficult to change the way the Inherits attribute works. If it affects backwards compatability though, we're probably looking at a .Net 4.0 change at best...

powerrush - Keep in mind this isn't really a MVC issue as much as an issue with how ASP.Net in general parses the "Inherits" attribute. It is just much more likely you'll encounter this issue while using the MVC framework.

For those of you that just want the fix, download the zip and follow the readme file from:

http://www.squaredroot.com/file.axd?file=MVC+Template+Fix.zip

Enjoy! :D

ScottGu has confirmed that it is a template bug that will be fixed in the next CTP. You may want to take a look at my recent post containing a template fix that automatically creates the designer files for you. No more right-clicking and selecting "Convert to Web Application"!

http://www.squaredroot.com/post/2008/01/MVC-Template-Fix.aspx

Posted a permanent fix in the form of updated template files here:

http://www.squaredroot.com/post/2008/01/MVC-Template-Fix.aspx

I noticed this issue a few weeks ago and it is definitely a bit of an annoyance. ScottGu posted a comment to my blog saying that it was in fact a bug in the MVC templates shipped in the CTP and mentioned an even easier way to fix this than the method described above. Check it out:

http://www.squaredroot.com/post/2007/12/MVC-Bug-Broken-Codebehind.aspx

Ooops. Didn't read your comment!

Thanks for all the kicks!

Johan Pettersson and Steve Harmon were both kind enough to point out a bug in my html. If you've downloaded the zipped source code I encourage you to download the new version I have posted.

MVC.info?

Yes it is, but that is longer to type and it doesn't really matter in the end, does it?

Say it ain't so, zowens! :(

Well... it is what it is and we'll get it when we get it. I was looking forward to playing with this all weekend, but now it looks like I'll have to spend time doing responsible stuff!

On a sidenote, I want to make sure Rory Blyth is credited with creating this and doing the work on the variable/constant replacements. I just added some additional features. I mention it on both the blog entry and the codeplex site, but I don't want to appear to be taking credit for his work.

gt, I can see where you are coming from with separation of concerns, but really defining constants isn't what I think of as adding business logic or the like to css. I personally find it to be an extension of the Don't Repeat Yourself philosophy. Besides the variable support there is also the comment and whitespace stripping, which is commonly done manually for both css and javascript. I find it preferable to do it on the fly rather than keep a separate file (the source version and the compressed version).

Three people so far. The person who created the CodePlex project originally (gmoothart) and two coworkers (ddouglass and ssansom). Is that frowned upon?

Why do you say that gt? It all gets output as standards-compliant to the browser.