NEW! Download Asp.net Core 3.1

Totally agree. asp.net team spend most time on demo api (eg. minimal API) and toy web UI framework(Blazor).

devs need a way to orginize their rest api and mvc is better than minimal API ,and also need a way for team work instead all the work done by 1 developer.

and for blazor ,

I am trying to build a Blazor Wasm with Net 5 template. I have checked individual user accounts, pwa, https, aspnet core hosted.

I updated to latest visual Studio, latest 5.0 sdk and runtime. But when It creates the project. The Blazor client could not be loaded. For some reason its looking for a 3.1 sdk. What do I do?

Download Asp.net Core 3.1

Download Zip 🔥 https://urllie.com/2y4D57 🔥

However, I still recommend that you use it in your core libraries - anything that may be reused in other applications. If you have code in a library that may also run in a UI app, or legacy ASP.NET app, or anywhere else there may be a context, then you should still use ConfigureAwait(false) in that library.

The following procedure shows how to convert the project code into a web application. To simplify the process, you can generate the project as a web application right from the start. In the previous section Generate a .NET core project, modify the dotnet new step's command with the following command.

To run the application on a web server, you need to bundle the compiled source code with a web.config configuration file and runtime dependencies. The dotnet tool provides a publish command that gathers these files in a directory based on the configuration in dotnet-core-tutorial.csproj.

Setting a date time value has been so highly optimised that I can't even fit the entire code into a single screen. The creativity of finding ways to save computation cycles and therefore score higher in the benchmarks is truly astonishing. The DateHeader class is a static class (which means it only gets initialised once as a singleton and is then kept in memory) with a static DateTimeOffset value (of course already stored as a byte array). Additionally a System.Threading.Timer object is also statically initialised with a one second interval. This Timer will run on a separate thread and set a new date time value once every second:

The aspcore-mw-ado-pg benchmark is what most .NET developers would probably call a low level "Platform" ASP.NET Core implementation. There is no higher level routing, no content negotiation, no other cross-cutting middlewares, no EntityFramework and still no actual HTML template rendering either, but at least it's ASP.NET Core.

If Razor Pages is indeed only available in ASP.NET Core and not .NET Framework, why do we need both tags? Occam's Razor suggests this is a mistake, and asp.net-core-razor-pages should get merged into razor-pages.

Yes, "razor pages" is the specific feature, and clearly the established tag here. Razor Pages is also only usable with ASP.NET Core, so there's not really a need to have that language name be in the tag, given that every question using razor-pages should also be using asp.net-core already, anyway.

At the time, I wanted to quickly stitch together a login / authentication solution, so I went with scaffolding something based on ASP.NET Core Identity: -us/aspnet/core/security/authentication/identity#configure-identity-services. It seems to me that this guide has changed since I made my project in the .NET Core 3.1 days. As an example, the guide now explicitly mentions the Cookie scheme. I do not know, what the behaviour of my code is where I do not specify it explicitly. e24fc04721