blocks|key|1286229|text|如果页面上的所有内容都是由Response.Write发送的，那么它就很棒。当我必须使用ASPX来为我动态生成的非HTML文件提供服务时，我会使用它。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1286230|如果你使用的是非空的ASPX页面，Response.Write就没有任何意义。|1286231|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

Response.Write is great, if everything on the page is sent by it. I use it when I have to use ASPX to serve non-HTML files that I generate on the fly.

Response.Write doesn't make any sense at all if you are using non-empty ASPX pages.

blocks|key|1286164|text|在aspx+-+inline服务器脚本标记中：|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1286165|<%25=+SomeProperty.Name+%25>|code-block|syntax|javascript|1286166|在代码中-这取决于环境，但通常有一个更好的替代，如HtmlTextWriter，ScriptManager+(用于注册脚本)，文本控件，占位符或其他东西。|1286167|entityMap^0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|D|7|L|8|@]|9|@]|A|$E|F]]|$1|G|3|H|5|6|7|M|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|I|3|-4|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|J|$]]

In the aspx - inline server script tags:

<pre><code>&lt;%= SomeProperty.Name %&gt;
</code></pre>

In the code - that depends on the circumstances but there's usually a better alternative such as a HtmlTextWriter, a ScriptManager (for registering your scripts), a literal control, a placeholder or something else.

blocks|key|4905080|text|还有很多其他的方法。我避免使用Response.Write，因为它取决于将内容写入输出的确切顺序。例如，我宁愿使用一个文本控件，并为它的Text属性赋值。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|4905081|我通常也会尽量避免使用<%25=+(这里返回值)+%25>内联语句，因为我喜欢让aspx页面只包含页面结构，并将服务器端代码语句保存在代码隐藏文件中。|4905082|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

There are many other ways. I avoid using Response.Write because it depends on the exact order in which things are written to the output. I would rather use for instance a Literal control and assign a value to its Text property.

I usually also try to avoid the &lt;%= (return a value here) %> inline statements, since I like to keep the aspx page to only contain page structure, and keep server-side code statements in the code-behind file.

blocks|key|842072|text|这取决于您的应用程序。记住，.aspx文件中的<%25=+"some+string“%25>仍然是Response.Write()的快捷方式。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|842073|如果您使用Response.Write()函数呈现所有的超文本标记语言，那么是的，也许他是对的。但是如果你使用它来编写内联代码，那么它实际上是相当不错的。|842074|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

Depends on your application. Remember that &lt;%= "some string" %> in your .aspx file is still a shortcut for Response.Write()

If you were rendering all your HTML using the Response.Write() function, then yeah, maybe he's right. But if you were using it for inline code, then it's actually pretty ok.

blocks|key|842178|text|除非该方法被标记为过时，否则我不会忽略它。它当然不是“老式的”。但在某些情况下，可能会有更好的替代方案，因为它们更易于维护。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|842179|例如，您可以考虑用HTML语言编写一组<%25=+%25>语句，但这是与HttpResponse.Write同时引入的，所以如果其中一个是“老式的”，那么它们都是“老式”的。|offset|length|style|CODE|842180|您可能还想考虑在其他情况下使用模板引擎。这要视情况而定。|842181|如果你的面试官不想详细说明，这也说明了面试官的一些问题。|842182|entityMap^0|0|J|6|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|O|8|@$D|P|E|Q|F|G]]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|I|5|6|7|R|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|J|3|K|5|6|7|S|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|L|3|-4|5|6|7|T|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|M|$]]

Unless that method is marked as obsolete, I wouldn't dismiss it. It's certainly not "old fashioned". But there may be cases where there are better alternatives, for they are more maintainable.

For example, you could consider writing a bunch of <code>&lt;%= %&gt;</code> statements in your HTML, but that was introduced at the same time as HttpResponse.Write, so if one of them is "old fashioned", they both are.

You might also want to consider using a templating engine in other cases. It all depends.

If your interviewer didn't want to elaborate, that also says something about the interviewer.

blocks|key|4905409|text|ASP.Net页面是一种高度结构化的软件，由负责提供自己的输出的控件层次结构组成。在这种机制下，Response.Write似乎过时了，因为它回到了原始的ASP页面，在那里一切都是内联呈现的。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|offset|length|style|CODE|entityRanges|data|4905410|现代页面只更新呈现自己输出的控件的属性。Response.Write通过中断控制输出的流来打破层次结构。|4905411|entityMap^0|1C|E|0|K|E|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|J|8|@$9|K|A|L|B|C]]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|M|8|@$9|N|A|O|B|C]]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|H|3|-4|5|6|7|P|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]]|I|$]]

An ASP.Net page is a highly structured piece of software consisting of a hierarchy of controls that are responsible for providing their own output. Within this regime, <code>Response.Write</code> seems outdated because it harkens back to the original ASP pages where everything was rendered inline.

Modern pages just update properties of controls that render their own output. <code>Response.Write</code> breaks the hierarchy by interrupting the flow of the control output.

blocks|key|1286198|text|我不认为“老式”这个词是面试官真正想说的。根据上下文，可能会有更好的方法来使用。如果您使用的是内联脚本标记，比如Jason的例子，那么<%25=约定可能更适合这个任务。然而，如果你做任何类型的视图逻辑，<%25+if+(*conditional*)+{+...+}+%25>，那么你的选择可能是有限的。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|offset|length|style|CODE|entityRanges|data|1286199|entityMap^0|1V|3|2R|W|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|H|8|@$9|I|A|J|B|C]|$9|K|A|L|B|C]]|D|@]|E|$]]|$1|F|3|-4|5|6|7|M|8|@]|D|@]|E|$]]]|G|$]]

I don't think "old fashioned" is the correct term the interviewer was really wanting to say. There may be better methods to use depending on context. If you are using inline script tags, such as Jason's example, then the <code>&lt;%=</code> convention may be better suited to the task. However, if you doing any kind of View logic, <code>&lt;% if (*conditional*) { ... } %&gt;</code> then your alternatives may be limited.

blocks|key|842223|text|这完全取决于您使用Response.Write做什么。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|842224|如果它要输出一个字符串以显示到页面上，那么也许您应该在页面上放置一个文本，然后设置该文本的文本，而不是执行Response.Write。|842225|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

It depends entirely on what you used Response.Write for.

If it was to output a string for display to the page, then maybe you should've put a Literal on the page and then set the Text of that literal rather than doing a Response.Write.

blocks|key|4905281|text|在某些情况下，您可能需要Response.Write。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|4905282|假设您将图像存储在数据库中，并希望通过字节数组将它们流式传输到页面上。我认为如果没有Response.Write你是做不到的。|4905283|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|F|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|-4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|E|$]]

There are probably certain circumstances where you need Response.Write.

Supposing you were storing images in a database and wanted to stream them via a byte array onto your page. I don't think you'd be able to do it without Response.Write.

blocks|key|4905329|text|我们有一些遗留代码，其中所有HTML输出都是在VB+DLL中创建的，因为在当时，这是使用分布式事务控制创建HTML的最快方法。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|4905330|然而，ASP.NET在某种程度上否定了这一需求，因为它为您编译了aspx文件和代码，并将其转换为DLL。|4905331|对于特定的任务，Response.Write仍然是可以的，但是绝大多数代码不再需要这样做。|4905332|entityMap^0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|I|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|J|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|-4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|G|$]]

We have some legacy code where all the HTML output was created in VB DLL's as it, at the time, was the fastest way of creating HTML with distributed transaction control.

However ASP.NET kind of negated the need for that because it compiled the aspx files and code behind to DLL's for you.

Response.Write is still OK for specific tasks, however the vast majority of coding no longer needs to do that.

blocks|key|4060331|text|不过，您是否提议使用Response.write进行调试呢？类似于：|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|4060332|Response.Write("Inside+first+loop.");|code-block|syntax|javascript|4060333|如果是这样的话，考虑到Visual+Studio/.NET中的新调试工具，我会说它已经过时了。|4060334|entityMap^0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|K|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|D|7|L|8|@]|9|@]|A|$E|F]]|$1|G|3|H|5|6|7|M|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|I|3|-4|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|J|$]]

Just a shot in the dark, but did you propose using Response.write for debugging? Something like :

<pre><code>Response.Write("Inside first loop.");
</code></pre>

If so, I'd say it is outdated given the new debugging tools in Visual Studio/.NET.

I recently had a techical test for a job interview where I did a Response.Write(). I was told that this was "old fashioned" and that there are better ways of doing this now. The interviewer wouldn't elaborate, so I'm keen to know what he was referring to. Anyone have any ideas?

Response.Write outdated?

翻译质量差，导致语言生硬或混乱。

没有提供实际的解决方法或示例。

解答不清晰，无法理解或解决问题。

页面排版不美观，阅读体验差。

文章

问答

视频

教程

学习中心

腾讯云实验室

直播

竞赛

腾讯云代码分析专区

腾讯iOA零信任安全管理系统专区

腾讯云架构师技术同盟交流圈

腾讯云数据库专区

腾讯云智能顾问专区

腾讯云原生专区

腾讯混元专区

腾讯云TCE专区

腾讯云Lighthouse专区

腾讯云HAI专区

腾讯云Edgeone专区

腾讯云存储专区

腾讯云智能专区

腾讯轻联专区 

腾讯云开发专区

TAPD专区

腾讯轻量云游戏服专区

腾讯云最具价值专家

腾讯云架构师技术同盟

腾讯云创作之星

腾讯云开发者先锋

腾讯云AI代码助手

云原生构建

TAPD 敏捷项目管理

Cloud Studio

SDK中心

API中心

命令行工具

功能1上新10个字符

功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符。

功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符。

功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符

功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符

功能4上新

文章&问答评论现已支持表情

全新交互，全新视觉，新增快捷键、悬浮工具栏、高亮块等功能并同时优化现有功能，全面提升创作效率和体验

社区富文本编辑器全新改版！诚邀体验～ 

精选全网热门MCP server，让你的AI更好用 🚀

💥开发者 MCP广场重磅上线！

涵盖代码开发、场景应用、自动测试全流程，助你从零构建专属AI助手

一站式MCP教程库，解锁AI应用新玩法

聚焦“写作效率、视觉美观与运行性能”三方面进行全面升级，为您提供更高效、稳定的创作环境

社区富文本&Markdown编辑器全新改版上线，欢迎大家体验!

诚挚邀请您参与本次调研，分享您的真实使用感受与建议。您的反馈至关重要，感谢您的支持与参与！

社区新版编辑器体验调研

我最近参加了一个求职面试的技术测试，我做了一个Response.Write()。有人告诉我，这是“过时的”，现在有更好的方法来做到这一点。面试官不愿详述，所以我很想知道他指的是什么。有谁有什么想法吗？

问Response.Write过时了吗？
EN

回答 11

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问Response.Write过时了吗？EN

回答 11

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

Stack Overflow用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问Response.Write过时了吗？
EN