Removing Visual Basic project Templates from Visual Studio 2019? - visual-studio-2019

Is there a way to remove the Visual Studio project templates from showing up in Visual Studio 2019? I'm never going to use them and I've had multiple occurences where I accidentially created a new Visual Basic project instead of a C# project.
I've tried removing the physical files from Common7\IDE\ProjectTemplates and clearing the cache but the project templates keep showing up in the dialog.

to remove a template from Visual Studio you may use:
dotnet new --uninstall NAMEOFTEMPLATE.Template
to uninstall some project types (Visual Basic maybe) try Change Visual Studio Tool from Setup...

Related

C# & Visual Studio : storage issue

I have a problem with Visual Studio.
When I create a new project and start programming and in between I save, at some point when I want to run it, Visual Studio does not accept my new code. It always executes the old code although I have overwritten it.
I have already re-downloaded Visual Studio 2 times but that didn't help. I use Visual Studio Community 2019
Try using Ctrl+shift+B to build it, and then running with F5, instead of Ctrl+B or F7.

Not able to see App_data folder in my MVC project in visual studio for mac

I am trying to learn MVC with EF on MacOS. I am using visual studio for mac and created an MVC project. I couldn't find App_Data folder under solution. please suggest how to get that. Also web.config file looks different compared to visual studio in windows. Is that normal?
you can add it manually like we do in windows visual studio

How to exclude wwwroot\lib in ASPNET Core using Visual Studio 2017

Using VSTS (not git) and use Visual Studio 2017 libman to manage client-side libraries. These libraries are put in wwwroot\lib. I don't want to add these to source code control.
I've tried putting a .tfignore in my project folder with:
wwwroot\lib
I also tried:
\wwwroot\lib
Regardless of what I do, all the wwwroot\lib files are put in source code control when I add a new client-side library via libman.
How can I ignore the lib files since they are managed/restored by Visual Studio libman feature?
Based on the comment above from Seabizkit, **/wwwroot/lib worked for me.

Empty .NET Core 2.0 project with MVC template in Visual studio 2017

Today I migrated from Visual studio 2015 to Visual studio 2017.
In visual studio 2015 whenever I wanted to create a new web project not only was I able to choose it as an empty project but also I was able to indicate my empty project be in which template by clicking on diverse check boxes in new project window. For example I was able to create a MVC project which all folders were empty.
I can not find this facilities in Visual studio 2017. If I choose a MVC project in new project windows it creates some default styles, views, and controller which I don't like. If I choose empty project then it don't have Model,View and Controller folders either.
So am I able to create an Empty + MVC + .Net Core 2 project in Visual studio 2017 or Microsoft simply removed this feature?
UPDATE
I have tried to first create an empty project and then add MVC to it by installing Microsoft.AspNet.Mvc through NUGET. But it just added MVC dependencies to my project. Am I have to create all needed folders (model, view, controller, shared....) manually? Its really frustrating.
I believe I have installed .NET Core properly. This screenshot of my New project window is a proof of that.

Shared Project Reference not available for MVC Projects in Visual Studio 2015

I have just upgraded from Visual Studio 2013 to Visual Studio 2015 and I now cant add a shared project reference to a MVC project. I can add them to Console and Class Library projects and upgraded projects that use them still have the working references, but you can see to link to Shared project, using the Visual Studio 2015 UI (right click on reference).
I suppose I could manually add the reference I need in the .csproj file, but I am concerned that there is a wider reason that these project types do not seem to support shared project types.
Is there a specific reason for this omission or is it an oversight?

Resources