I am new to this project and eager to test the power I am hoping it will provide me. I have been able to finally get a build to compile. However, I had to do a few things manually to get everything happy. Below is the list. Please confirm if this is expected behavior, a known issue or something else that may be unique to me.
Observations:
1) Barking about Microsoft.CSharp.dll not being found (and a couple other related errors). Located some info about that being due to use of Lamda expressions, which I do. No problem, added the explicit reference to the DLL and all good.
2) As confirmed in another recent thread, base view type is not being set for the views, just the model set in <> and no type. I have tried using my custom base view, fully qualifying the view, and even using the built-in view. Nothing produces a complete base type reference in the class and I have to manually add the base type so it can compile.
3) Additionally, none of my added namespaces in the web.config are being added to the generated class, thus tons of reference issues. Seems like web.config in neither the Views folder nor root level is being used. Adding the namespaces explicitly to each view, allows it to compile.
4) While model is explicitly set in the view, any use of the generic HTML editor helpers end up with an object reference thus the Lamda expressions are failing. Tried a couple different things, but cleanest workaround was to fully qualify the model class, even though the namespace had been added to the view already. For example, this didn't work:
@using VideoLibrary.Application.Messages
@model VideoMessage
But this did:
@using VideoLibrary.Application.Messages
@model VideoLibrary.Application.Messages.VideoMessage
Comments: OK, thanks. I didn't intend for this to be a reported issue [yet]. I will see about spending some time trying to retrofit your test solution to replicate more of my environment. The problem is, there are a number of differences between a simple MVC-templated app and what I am running (including running on MVC 5.0). For one, and related to many of my observations above, I have an entire framework I built, that reside in other libraries I link in. Perhaps the issue is with this abstraction and dependency and that is OK if so. I was really just doing a quick check to see if anything I was reporting was actually expected or known, before I go spending a bunch of time reproing something that is either not broke because it is expected or by design or already known. I did check through as much of the issues that seemed close, but you never know for sure. However I understand. I will see if I can import some of the environment I have, but it will be unrealistic to duplicate completely. I will take the lack of input on any of the observations above to mean none of what I observed is known/expected, correct? (Except the first one about CSharp as I see your test solution has that explicitly referenced too - I guess that is required.) Thanks, Mike
Observations:
1) Barking about Microsoft.CSharp.dll not being found (and a couple other related errors). Located some info about that being due to use of Lamda expressions, which I do. No problem, added the explicit reference to the DLL and all good.
2) As confirmed in another recent thread, base view type is not being set for the views, just the model set in <> and no type. I have tried using my custom base view, fully qualifying the view, and even using the built-in view. Nothing produces a complete base type reference in the class and I have to manually add the base type so it can compile.
3) Additionally, none of my added namespaces in the web.config are being added to the generated class, thus tons of reference issues. Seems like web.config in neither the Views folder nor root level is being used. Adding the namespaces explicitly to each view, allows it to compile.
4) While model is explicitly set in the view, any use of the generic HTML editor helpers end up with an object reference thus the Lamda expressions are failing. Tried a couple different things, but cleanest workaround was to fully qualify the model class, even though the namespace had been added to the view already. For example, this didn't work:
@using VideoLibrary.Application.Messages
@model VideoMessage
But this did:
@using VideoLibrary.Application.Messages
@model VideoLibrary.Application.Messages.VideoMessage
Comments: OK, thanks. I didn't intend for this to be a reported issue [yet]. I will see about spending some time trying to retrofit your test solution to replicate more of my environment. The problem is, there are a number of differences between a simple MVC-templated app and what I am running (including running on MVC 5.0). For one, and related to many of my observations above, I have an entire framework I built, that reside in other libraries I link in. Perhaps the issue is with this abstraction and dependency and that is OK if so. I was really just doing a quick check to see if anything I was reporting was actually expected or known, before I go spending a bunch of time reproing something that is either not broke because it is expected or by design or already known. I did check through as much of the issues that seemed close, but you never know for sure. However I understand. I will see if I can import some of the environment I have, but it will be unrealistic to duplicate completely. I will take the lack of input on any of the observations above to mean none of what I observed is known/expected, correct? (Except the first one about CSharp as I see your test solution has that explicitly referenced too - I guess that is required.) Thanks, Mike