Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 209713
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 11, 20262026-05-11T17:56:25+00:00 2026-05-11T17:56:25+00:00

Although the classic ASP method of server-side includes works in ASP.NET, I get the

  • 0

Although the classic ASP method of server-side includes works in ASP.NET, I get the impression it is not the preferred method. How am I “supposed” to be achieving the same effect?

This is how I’m doing it at the moment:
<!-- #include file ="functionlib.aspx" -->

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-11T17:56:25+00:00Added an answer on May 11, 2026 at 5:56 pm

    You now have a number of options that provide this effect, but in a different manner.

    • User Controls (.ascx)
    • Master Pages (.master)
    • Server Side Controls (.dll)
    • Class Libraries (.dll)
    • App_Code Classes (.cs/.vb)

    Each are used for differently to achieve different things. It depends what you’re really trying to do. Given the name of your include file, I’d imagine you’re trying to include library functions that will be used within the context of your page.

    Consequently you’d write a class library that contains the methods and import them into your application/aspx.

    If you’re looking at templating a page that will do most of the layout work to provide a body for differing content then you’ll be interested in Master Pages.

    If you’re looking at templating controls that can be used in many pages, then you’re going to be after User Controls.

    If you’re looking at templating controls that can be used by many users across many projects, then you’ll be looking at Server Side Controls.

    If you’re looking at a library of classes/methods then you’ll develop a class library or use an app_code class which can be JIT compiled the first time it’s called. This could at a stretch be considered more like classic ASP, but really it functions more like a class from a class library as a single unit. You can call it from within your codebehind or within <% %> tags in your aspx/ascx code without requiring a reference to a class library.

    We don’t really use “includes” per se any more, but each of these tools in your toolkit allow you to provide similar concepts for different scenarios. As a developer you will interact with the entire page lifecycle of your web pages differently. ASP.NET is a very different beast than classic ASP. It truly takes a different view/approach and will take some amount of patience to figure out the differences.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

Classic ASP had 'server side includes' so that one could easily design a generic
I've inherited an old Classic ASP website to modify. Although not requested up-front, I'd
I am currently converting a very old, but working classic ASP site to ASP.Net.
I have two websites (one asp classic and the other asp.net) which we would
I currently develop under iis for classic asp for my work experience although for
I need to get visitors country information using classic asp 3.0, i'm using below
I'm converting classic ASP over to ASP.Net, and came up with this error for
Clarification: this is not about user agent calls to pages, but Classic ASP calling
Although obviously not all scenarios can be covered by a single design, is it
Although the java.net.Socket and java.net.ServetSocket give me powerful networking capabilities I wouldn't want to

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.