On Mon, 2009-10-26 at 21:33 +0100, Federico Di Gregorio wrote: > 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? > > 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.
Ah. Well then, unify the two patches. :-) Specifically, the specialized database generation logic should also use the EntityInterfaces type (which should likely be simplified to -type or something). That way a single option controls what types are generated, and by implication will control whether the specialized DataContext is generated (or not, again, based on the type's name). This would be straightforward and easily documentable (I hope). - Jon --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
