Why C# is not a good choice for web development?

Even now, with the project already ongoing, you can still set things straight. Put your project in source control. Then create a "master" branch that will contain the code released to production. Develop new features in a separate "develop" branch. If you need to fix something in production without updating to the version in development, create a new branch off "master", fix the issue, commit and release this new version, merge it into develop, and carry on.

A workflow like this, or other variations, is a good practice even if you work with platforms that support deploying single classes/files instead of packages.

For an example, see: A successful Git branching model (http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/).

See also the book "The Pragmatic Programmer: From Journeyman to Master" (http://pragprog.com/the-pragmatic-programmer/extracts/toc).

Good luck.

Sounds like the wrong project type is being picked. If they used a Web Site Project rather than a Web Application Project the files would be compiled JIT in the same way as PHP and Python.

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd547590(v=vs.110).a...

Having said which the page title is wrong, the issue is with Microsoft's web deployment system and frameworks. C# as a language is still a nice language and shouldn't be lumped with the other parts of the .NET stack.

As others have said this is really a source control problem but still there's a workaround. Just copy the production dll and use .Net Reflector (or similar) to decompile it back in to C#. Make your edits, recompile and upload.

so you blame a compiled language for your poor dependency management and app architecture? it's not C#'s fault, it's how your app is put together.

And your excuse for not having the app under source control is a cop-out and shameful. Enjoy your scripting languages and short-cuts...