When describing llblgen -> nh/arAR - it's fair to assume we mean db first design when saying that llblgen is database centric and ar is not..
I think :) w:// On Wed, Apr 8, 2009 at 9:12 AM, Tim TSH <[email protected]> wrote: > AR is very database centric and totally not domain centric > > 2009/4/8 Jason Meckley <[email protected]> > > >> I have used LLBL in the past before discovering NH. LLBL is a great >> tool for RAD development. The support is excellent, and the tools that >> come with the framework itself are great. >> >> So why would I move away from LLBL >> 1. unit testing and TDD. now it could also be I'm new to unit testing, >> TDD, etc. but the LLBL framework would get in the way of writing a >> unit test. >> 2. LLBL Entities require extranious members/inheritance that has >> nothing to do with my Domain. While moving towards DDD I found LLBL to >> add noise to the domain. >> 3. LLBL requires a database schema to generate the domain. I have >> really enjoyed the power of designing the database around the domain >> for greenfield projects. And the ability to map legacy DBs to a rich >> domain is great. >> >> LLBL definitely has a place in development. I consider it the >> "gateway" framework to escaping the DataSet nighmare. it was for me >> anyway. In closing. I find LLBL is database centric while NH/AR is >> domain centric. >> >> On Apr 7, 2:53 pm, novnov <[email protected]> wrote: >> > Wayne thank you it does help. LLBLGEN is one of the most commonly >> > praised ORMs, and I'd be curious to hear why you've moved to AR/NH? As >> > you say, tradeoffs on both sides, but I'd be curious to hear your >> > thoughts. >> > >> > Frankly I think we could use as much hand holding as possible. But the >> > Active Record examples are pretty straightforward. I am not sure how >> > versed in NHibernate we would need to become, that's a concern. >> > >> > Has anyone here checked out Entity Framework? >> > >> > I can see ORMs being a huge aid. We just never got exposure...so it's >> > more of a learning curve thing. We're effecient at what we do now, and >> > starting from zilch on a new stack is always a time drain at the >> > start. >> > >> > We're so new to flex that I'm afraid I can't offer you too much on >> > that. .Net and flex seem to go well together. >> > >> > On Apr 7, 2:10 am, Wayne Douglas <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > Hey >> > >> > > First comment: >> > >> > > >So far we've been able to keep clear of ORMs >> > >> > > You make it sound like you've been trying to stay away from ORMs!!! >> ORM >> > > isn't a bad thing you need to stear clear of! Honestly :) >> > >> > > Second: >> > >> > > I come from an LLBLGEN background and have recently switched to AR/NH >> - to >> > > be honest - they both have their pros and cons but are both a million >> miles >> > > better than writting your own code for the purpose. They will both >> work with >> > > whatever .NET/CLI language you want. AR is about as simple as you'd >> want it >> > > and the only downer about everything being in C# is that if your guys >> aren't >> > > used to C# they may find some of the examples a bit foreign. >> > >> > > As a side - what's the workflow like working with flex in a .net >> > > environment? I've thought about this doing a few times. >> > >> > > hth >> > >> > > w:// >> > >> > > On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 8:31 PM, novnov <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > > This is really a scattershot question because I have little exposure >> > > > to ORMs and only vaguely formulated requirements. >> > >> > > > Some background...I like postgresql a lot and also use sql server >> and >> > > > oracle. I/we are usually responsible for all of the parts of an app, >> > > > from the rdbms to the user interface. We do a lot on Windows with >> .net >> > > > (visual basic) but are getting exposure to flex on the interface >> side >> > > > of things. So far we've been able to keep clear of ORMs and code >> > > > generators. >> > >> > > > A project is coming up which will need be be deployed against both >> > > > postgresql and oracle (different deploys). This may be forcing us to >> > > > use an ORM so that the interface is more independent of the rdbms. >> > >> > > > Is NHibernate and maybe Castle Project Active Record a good solution >> > > > for our needs? The ORM would not have to be open source, ie we could >> > > > buy something. We want it to be as simple to pick up and use as >> > > > possible. We don't want to lose the ability to execute procs in >> > > > postgres and I'm worried that nhibernate has that limitation, as the >> > > > front page states that stored procedures are supported for sql >> server. >> > >> > > > Finally, is Active Record ok with visual basic? Most if not all of >> the >> > > > examples are in C#. >> > >> > > -- >> > > Cheers, >> > >> > > w://- Hide quoted text - >> > >> > > - Show quoted text - >> >> > > > > -- Cheers, w:// --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Castle Project Users" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/castle-project-users?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
