3

I was thinking about switching one of my projects (and after that subsequently other projects too) to Spark View Engine but after todays research I ran into problem of a lack of Intellisense for Visual studio 2010. Not only that but it seems that the project is not maintained regularly.

So I'm left with a feeling that I should not choose Spark at this time yet. However, apparently NHaml has the same "issues" too.

I know it is discussed in more detail here ASP.NET MVC View Engine Comparison

but I would still like you thoughts on what to choose or just stay with WebForms view engine for now?

Community
  • 1
  • 1
mare
  • 13,033
  • 24
  • 102
  • 191

1 Answers1

14

I love Sparks, compared to the WebForms view engine. All views get so incredibly clean, compared to the normal one. Intellisense or not, I'd still take Sparks. Easy choice. You still get runtime errors when something is missing, and when you get used to not having Intellisense there, it's not that much of a problem. Debugging might take those five extra seconds, but hey - readability and clean views before marginally quicker debugging of (mostly) simple syntax-issues.

I've used Spark for a project through four months now, and I'll never go back to the default one. Never had any serious problems with it once you get the hang of it, and it's absolutely worth it. You'll know when you see it in action for real :-)

Arve Systad
  • 5,471
  • 1
  • 32
  • 58
  • I know all the advantages and yes, views would really look much cleaner but I think productivity would fall considerably and what's the most problematic is that I need to choose a techonology which has wide support and defined development path even over a longer period of time - we cannot start a project now to found out 6 months later that we took the wrong path. Hopefully you understand my concerns and, sadly, it seems that none of the third party view engines are up to this as of now. – mare May 30 '10 at 19:57
  • I see. Then, the default one might be the best one for you. However, Spark does support everything that's currently in ASP.NET MVC, so unless you will be updating the basic platform too, Spark should manage. And for the support part, I think the documentation (which is actively being updated AFAIK) plus forums like this should suffice. However, it boils down to the feeling you have about it all. If you feel insecure about Spark, then use the default one. – Arve Systad May 30 '10 at 20:13
  • 1
    @Arve Systad: That's not entirely true, Spark's idea of *Areas* is different from MVC 2's idea of *Areas*. – Roman Jun 01 '10 at 03:24
  • @R0MANARMY How are they different? I've only slightly used Areas until now, and only with Sparks - and it seems to be exactly what i want from it anyways. – Arve Systad Jun 01 '10 at 16:19
  • 1
    @Arve Systad: Just the location of the view. Spark expects views for the areas to be under the main View folder (at least as of 1.1). MVC2 expects views to be in the appropriate folder under Areas. – Roman Jun 01 '10 at 16:59
  • 1
    Ah, I see. Well, I dislike the Areas folder, so then Spark does it all so much better :-) I guess you can configure it yourself somehow, or if not - download the source and compile it the way you want it...? ;) – Arve Systad Jun 01 '10 at 20:39