«

Hello.

Could anyone please clarify one thing.

Suppose I have to classes:
1. A inherits UserControl
2. B inherits A

BOTH A AND B HAVE HTML MARKUP IN RELATED ASCX FILES.

Then suppose I want to instantiate control B. I have three options:
1. Propgrammatically instatiate B through new B();
2. Propgrammatically instatiate B through LoadControl("B.ascx");
3. Declare control B in ASPX/ASCX of a container and refer B in code-behind
file of a container.

The quiestion is the following: Which of instantiation options are correct
to use?

I've tried (3) but it seems that html markup (in ASCX) of class A isn't
being parsed, so those children of A (from ASCX) are not being created.

TIA

Hi,

ascx files aren't in the inheritance chain (assuming if I understand your
scenario correctly). If you put B to derive from A, it means B derives from
code-behind class of A, not the A.ascx being parsed through normal ASP.NET's
mechanisms (it is parsed dynamically or via Page.ParseControl/LoadControl
etc)

I think master pages would be closer solution to this.


--
Teemu Keiski
AspInsider, ASP.NET MVP
http://blogs.aspadvice.com/joteke
http://teemukeiski.net

"Ivan A. Vasilyev" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Hello.
>
> Could anyone please clarify one thing.
>
> Suppose I have to classes:
> 1. A inherits UserControl
> 2. B inherits A
>
> BOTH A AND B HAVE HTML MARKUP IN RELATED ASCX FILES.
>
> Then suppose I want to instantiate control B. I have three options:
> 1. Propgrammatically instatiate B through new B();
> 2. Propgrammatically instatiate B through LoadControl("B.ascx");
> 3. Declare control B in ASPX/ASCX of a container and refer B in
> code-behind file of a container.
>
> The quiestion is the following: Which of instantiation options are correct
> to use?
>
> I've tried (3) but it seems that html markup (in ASCX) of class A isn't
> being parsed, so those children of A (from ASCX) are not being created.
>
> TIA
>

Hello

Thanx for the answer.
I need to extend some ascx-based user control. So i think composition
(insted of inheritance) is the only way to go.

"Teemu Keiski" <> ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌ/ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌÁ × ÎÏ×ÏÓÔÑÈ
ÓÌÅÄÕÀÝÅÅ: news:%...
> Hi,
>
> ascx files aren't in the inheritance chain (assuming if I understand your
> scenario correctly). If you put B to derive from A, it means B derives
> from code-behind class of A, not the A.ascx being parsed through normal
> ASP.NET's mechanisms (it is parsed dynamically or via
> Page.ParseControl/LoadControl etc)
>
> I think master pages would be closer solution to this.
>
>
> --
> Teemu Keiski
> AspInsider, ASP.NET MVP
> http://blogs.aspadvice.com/joteke
> http://teemukeiski.net
>
> "Ivan A. Vasilyev" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> Hello.
>>
>> Could anyone please clarify one thing.
>>
>> Suppose I have to classes:
>> 1. A inherits UserControl
>> 2. B inherits A
>>
>> BOTH A AND B HAVE HTML MARKUP IN RELATED ASCX FILES.
>>
>> Then suppose I want to instantiate control B. I have three options:
>> 1. Propgrammatically instatiate B through new B();
>> 2. Propgrammatically instatiate B through LoadControl("B.ascx");
>> 3. Declare control B in ASPX/ASCX of a container and refer B in
>> code-behind file of a container.
>>
>> The quiestion is the following: Which of instantiation options are
>> correct to use?
>>
>> I've tried (3) but it seems that html markup (in ASCX) of class A isn't
>> being parsed, so those children of A (from ASCX) are not being created.
>>
>> TIA
>>
>
>

Sorry for delay, one way also is to put the layout/controls of the parent UC
to be created in code. That way it is inherited.


--
Teemu Keiski
AspInsider, ASP.NET MVP
http://blogs.aspadvice.com/joteke
http://teemukeiski.net

"Ivan A. Vasilyev" <> wrote in message
news:...
> Hello
>
> Thanx for the answer.
> I need to extend some ascx-based user control. So i think composition
> (insted of inheritance) is the only way to go.
>
> "Teemu Keiski" <> ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌ/ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌÁ × ÎÏ×ÏÓÔÑÈ
> ÓÌÅÄÕÀÝÅÅ: news:%...
>> Hi,
>>
>> ascx files aren't in the inheritance chain (assuming if I understand your
>> scenario correctly). If you put B to derive from A, it means B derives
>> from code-behind class of A, not the A.ascx being parsed through normal
>> ASP.NET's mechanisms (it is parsed dynamically or via
>> Page.ParseControl/LoadControl etc)
>>
>> I think master pages would be closer solution to this.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Teemu Keiski
>> AspInsider, ASP.NET MVP
>> http://blogs.aspadvice.com/joteke
>> http://teemukeiski.net
>>
>> "Ivan A. Vasilyev" <> wrote in message
>> news:...
>>> Hello.
>>>
>>> Could anyone please clarify one thing.
>>>
>>> Suppose I have to classes:
>>> 1. A inherits UserControl
>>> 2. B inherits A
>>>
>>> BOTH A AND B HAVE HTML MARKUP IN RELATED ASCX FILES.
>>>
>>> Then suppose I want to instantiate control B. I have three options:
>>> 1. Propgrammatically instatiate B through new B();
>>> 2. Propgrammatically instatiate B through LoadControl("B.ascx");
>>> 3. Declare control B in ASPX/ASCX of a container and refer B in
>>> code-behind file of a container.
>>>
>>> The quiestion is the following: Which of instantiation options are
>>> correct to use?
>>>
>>> I've tried (3) but it seems that html markup (in ASCX) of class A isn't
>>> being parsed, so those children of A (from ASCX) are not being created.
>>>
>>> TIA
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

I have to avoid changing parent user control. But thanx anyway WBR.


"Teemu Keiski" <> ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌ/ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌÁ × ÎÏ×ÏÓÔÑÈ
ÓÌÅÄÕÀÝÅÅ: news:...
> Sorry for delay, one way also is to put the layout/controls of the parent
> UC to be created in code. That way it is inherited.
>
>
> --
> Teemu Keiski
> AspInsider, ASP.NET MVP
> http://blogs.aspadvice.com/joteke
> http://teemukeiski.net
>
> "Ivan A. Vasilyev" <> wrote in message
> news:...
>> Hello
>>
>> Thanx for the answer.
>> I need to extend some ascx-based user control. So i think composition
>> (insted of inheritance) is the only way to go.
>>
>> "Teemu Keiski" <> ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌ/ÓÏÏÂÝÉÌÁ × ÎÏ×ÏÓÔÑÈ
>> ÓÌÅÄÕÀÝÅÅ: news:%...
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> ascx files aren't in the inheritance chain (assuming if I understand
>>> your scenario correctly). If you put B to derive from A, it means B
>>> derives from code-behind class of A, not the A.ascx being parsed through
>>> normal ASP.NET's mechanisms (it is parsed dynamically or via
>>> Page.ParseControl/LoadControl etc)
>>>
>>> I think master pages would be closer solution to this.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Teemu Keiski
>>> AspInsider, ASP.NET MVP
>>> http://blogs.aspadvice.com/joteke
>>> http://teemukeiski.net
>>>
>>> "Ivan A. Vasilyev" <> wrote in message
>>> news:...
>>>> Hello.
>>>>
>>>> Could anyone please clarify one thing.
>>>>
>>>> Suppose I have to classes:
>>>> 1. A inherits UserControl
>>>> 2. B inherits A
>>>>
>>>> BOTH A AND B HAVE HTML MARKUP IN RELATED ASCX FILES.
>>>>
>>>> Then suppose I want to instantiate control B. I have three options:
>>>> 1. Propgrammatically instatiate B through new B();
>>>> 2. Propgrammatically instatiate B through LoadControl("B.ascx");
>>>> 3. Declare control B in ASPX/ASCX of a container and refer B in
>>>> code-behind file of a container.
>>>>
>>>> The quiestion is the following: Which of instantiation options are
>>>> correct to use?
>>>>
>>>> I've tried (3) but it seems that html markup (in ASCX) of class A isn't
>>>> being parsed, so those children of A (from ASCX) are not being created.
>>>>
>>>> TIA
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>