CODEWITHSUNDEEP
htmlasp-classicresponse.write
Eddie
Eddie

Reputation: 235

Response.Write or plain ol' HTML

What is better coding practice, with speed in mind (Classic ASP):

sPg=sPg& "<select id=""actions"" onchange=""emact(this.value)"">"
sPg=sPg& "<option value=""""></option>"
sPg=sPg& "<option value=""read"">read</option>"
sPg=sPg& "<option value=""unread"">unread</option>"
sPg=sPg& "<option value=""spam"">spam</option>"
sPg=sPg& "<option value=""unspam"">unspam</option>"
sPg=sPg& "<option value=""delete"">delete</option>"
sPg=sPg& "<option value=""undelete"">undelete</option>"

OR

<select id="actions" onchange="emact(this.value)">
<option></option>
<option value="read">read</option>
<option value="unread">unread</option>
<option value="spam">spam</option>
<option value="unspam">unspam</option>
<option value="delete">delete</option>
<option value="undelete">undelete</option>

think this, but on a way larger scale (online store backend written this way almost completely, working on a new version) - I am going convert it all to easy to manage HTML instead of response.write each time, but I just want to know the by doing that, I am not digging myself a hole.

Upvotes: 1

Views: 779

Answers (3)

Oded
Oded

Reputation: 499212

That's what I would do.

There is absolutely no good reason to go with creating the whole HTML structure through string concatenation, and you will gain a bit of performance by changing to straight HTML.

It would also be more maintainable, as you won't have to worry about escaping quotes and making sure your strings are properly concatenated.

Upvotes: 1

John
John

Reputation: 16007

Wouldn't the argument for using Response.Write over HTML be the same one for parameterizing SQL statements over straight SQL queries? Meaning, to close a few loopholes for possible injection?

Upvotes: 0

Hogan
Hogan

Reputation: 70538

If you are re-writing why are you going to use 10 year old technology?

(Use the 2nd one.)

Upvotes: 1

Related Questions