In the end I opened a new empty project on the left, and an "Internet" wizard generated one of the right. Using the generated one as guidance I slowly add stuff to the empty one. It's working acceptably well so far, but there is so much inter-dependent code in the wizard project that it takes some concentration to figure out the minimum that I need.
What irritates me is that the crappy O'Rielly ASP.NET MVC book that I studied so diligently to get me started does not mention a lot of the "magic" in the wizard project. There are magical conventions and tricks everywhere wiring-up code and markup that I'm discovering as I go. As I said last year, I was finally fed up with all the magic, verbosity and complex lifecycle of Web Forms and wanted to move to MVC to have more control, but I'm confronted by a new set of magic (but at least I suppose there's less of it!). Sometimes I'm tempted to go all the way back to Http Request and Response and do it all myself the old CGI way! *Greg K* On 23 August 2014 15:09, Stephen Price <step...@perthprojects.com> wrote: > I think there is an option for blank solution, and then you tick the MVC > box. It's changed a few times recently but it's getting better to start > with what you want so you can add it rather than have to remove it. > > > On Sat, Aug 23, 2014 at 12:37 PM, Greg Keogh <g...@mira.net> wrote: > >> Folks, this afternoon I was compelled to start a demo web app for >> someone, and I figured it was time commit to MVC 4 and use it as a >> realistic training exercise. The app will be quite simple: A login page, a >> pick list page and a data entry page; no themes; no AJAX, no jQuery. >> >> A new MVC4 Internet solution created by the VS2013 wizard is grotesque >> overkill with 52 references and dozens of scripts and images. I was about >> to start stripping all the stuff I don't need away, but I'm not sure what >> needed or not and I could easily break the thing to hell. >> >> What do others in here do when they want to start a new MVC 4 project? Do >> you start with an empty one, or strip down a generated one, or something >> else more convenient that I'm not aware of? >> >> *Greg K* >> > >
