In ASP.NET 2 Microsoft introduced the Membership provider. By many accounts it is not perfect, but as a one size fits all solution it's not bad. Plus it had a major advantage that a lot of other people would also be using it, so if you wanted to grab a forum solution to stick on your site, chances were it would use the same Membership provider.

Now though there is a second Membership provider from Microsoft called SimpleMembership. It simplifies a lot of things that weren't needed with the original Membership provider and also introduces support for working with OAuth providers. Not only that but if you create the MVC 4 project from the default template that is what your solution will be set up to use.

The problem however is Membership and SimpleMembership are not compatible. They store their information in separate tables and if you do try to copy all the users from one to the other, you will soon discover the hashing algorithm used on the password is different. You probably also had all your passwords one way hashed so you can't even generate the new ones.

There is a solution however. Paul Brown has written a nice bit of code to update the MVC 4 account controller so that when your users log in they will first be authorised against SimpleMembership, if that fails it will then authorise against the original Membership and if that succeeds it will generate the new password in SimpleMembership using the one just provided by the user.

Over time as your users log in the will be slowly migrated over. The second time the log in the SimpleMembership will authorise them and the extra code won't even be hit.

http://pretzelsteelersfan.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/migrating-legacy-apps-to-new.html

Calorie Buddy is the latest of my apps released during summer of this year. Following on from the series of apps Training Buddy and Weight Buddy, Calorie Buddy is another app aimed at helping you keep track of your general health and fitness.

As the name suggests Calorie Buddy is all about monitoring your calorie intake. Simply set a target, enter your consumption each day and a handy pie chart will show you how many calories you have available left to eat that day. To navigate between different days simply swipe to the left or right.

One of Calorie Buddy's best features though is its live tile that enables you to see your remaining calories that day without even opening the app!

Download Calorie Buddy today

This is simple stuff but is something I see people easily miss by just not thinking about it.

A string is an immutable object, which means once created it can not be altered. So if you want to do a replace or append some more text to the end a new object will be created.

A StringBuilder however is a buffer of characters that can be altered without the need for a new object to be created.

In the majority of situations a string is a perfectly reasonable choice and creating an extra 1 or 2 objects when you append a couple of other strings isn't going to make a significant impact on the performance of your program. But what happens when you are using strings in a loop.

A few weeks ago one of my developers had written some code that went through a loop building up some text. It looked a little like this:

Everything worked apart from the fact it took 30seconds to execute!

He was searching through convinced that the linq expressions in the middle was what was taking the time, and was at the point of deciding it could not go any faster without a new approach.

I pointed out not only had he used strings rather than a StringBuilder, but the loop also created around 10 string objects within it. The loop which repeated a couple thousand times was therefore creating 20000 objects that weren't needed. After we switched froms strings to a StringBuilders the loop executed in milliseconds.

So remember when your trying to work out why your code may be slow, remember the basic stuff.

Using 3rd party components while essential, can also be a headache. All to often you can find yourself spending hours following the setup instructions to the letter only for it to not work. Other times you know it's the exact component you want to use but it seems while the guys may have spent a huge effort in writing to component they seemingly never got round to writing anything to tell you how to use it.

Every so often though I come across a component that works first time and does exactly what you want. One such component that I've found this with recently ImageResizer.

I needed a simple way for images to be resized for a product listing on an eCommerce platform written in Classic ASP. Image resizing can be a real pain, there's the decision of do you do it when the images are uploaded or on the fly, if you do it on the fly there's a a huge number of mistakes you can make and nearly every example of how to do image resizing includes a couple of them. Then lastly in either scenario you need to make sure the end result is actually decent quality.

With image resizer I was done in 5 minutes! It's actually a .NET component rather than Classic ASP but that wasn't an issue. You create a bin folder, add a couple of simple lines to your web.config file then put an extra extension on the image path plus parameters for the size you want and that's it!

If your doing a .NET project it's also available on NuGet making it even easier to get up and running.