Il giorno lun, 26/10/2009 alle 16.15 -0400, Jonathan Pryor ha scritto: > Silly question, but why wouldn't we want to generate the specialized > DataContext subclass?
Hi, I can explain that. We have a framework were we generate the code in separate files and if every file contains a copy of the DataContext subclass we end with multiple copies of the same code. Now, why generate code in separate files? We have several reasons: 1) better output from SCM history and diffs 2) 1-to-1 mapping to other generated files (we also generate XML forms, proxy code and so on) 3) even if we have only 1 PostgreSQL database we like to place the generated classes in different namespaces because some tables are generic and part of a framework while others are specific to the application We can just keep our own version of DbMetal but if the changes don't break anything and are generic enough to be useful, why not upstream? federico -- Federico Di Gregorio http://people.initd.org/fog Debian GNU/Linux Developer [email protected] INIT.D Developer [email protected] E tu usa il prefisso corretto Re: non R:, questa รจ una ML seria. -- cosmos, su debian-italian --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DbLinq" 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/dblinq?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
