But I think that changes the terminology more than the underlying question.
We have the options:
1) AR -> NH -> MSSQL (plus others, which we'll ignore for now)
2) AR -> LINQ -> NH -> MSSQL, et al.
3) LINQ -> MSSQL
What are the pro & cons of each option.
One con of (3) is that it's primarily limited to MSSQL (although
providers for other DBs are available at varying stability), but
that's essentially a binary option: It's either irrelevant (if you
are using MSSQL) or immediately disqualifying (if you use some other
DB)
--
Truth,
James
On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 12:10 AM, Markus Zywitza
<markus.zywi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Wrong question, wrong answer...
>
> It's neither Linq2SQL nor Linq2objects. L2SQL is not only LINQ but a
> LINQ provider on top of MS mapping wizards. LINQ2AR is a wrapper
> around LINQ2NH (or NHLinq), which are LINQ providers for NHibernate.
> In the end, it means that you can use ActiveRecord with the powers of
> NHibernate and the IntelliSense of a LINQ-Provider.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Castle Project Users" group.
To post to this group, send email to castle-project-users@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
castle-project-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
