Hi Jeremy, I knew he was writing a book but have not spent any time with that resource. Thank you for the advice, I will take a look.
In regards to having a semantic model for fluent nhibernate , I thought that the classes you can find in the FluentNHibernate.MappingModel namespace of the core were the beginnings of that model. I will concede that they are not very rich at the moment, but I expect that will change once support for conventions and automapping is introduced. It is possible that I misunderstood though, so if you think I've missed the point completely, and those classes are NOT the beginnings of a semantic model, please say so! I agree with you that NHibernate needs to shed its dependence on xml, but this seems like a very big problem. I have a thin glimmer of vain, unrealistic hope that this branch will grow to be successful enough that nhibernate proper will be open to adding support for configuration directly from our semantic model. Were that to happen we could rip out the underlying Hbm structure and say goodbye to xml. But until some very big changes occur on the nhibernate side of things, I see no alternative to generating xml. I also am not content just to sit and wait until these changes happen. I would rather try to make progress even if the solution does not seem ideal, and see where that takes us. Thanks! Paul Batum On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 11:35 PM, Jeremy D. Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > Paul, > > If you haven't already, spend some time with Fowler's patterns for Internal > DSL's at http://martinfowler.com/dslwip/. He has quite a bit of writing > that deals with this very subject. What we want to do is have a separate > "Semantic Model" that models the mapping, and just make the FI part write > and configure the mapping model. I definitely agree that things like auto > mapping and conventions will work much more smoothly with this approach as > opposed to writing to the Xml. I am dubious about the HBM class structure > though. I think NHibernate itself needs a new Semantic Model. > > At some point I think Fluent NHibernate needs to completely break away from > generating the XML altogether and use different mechanisms. > > Regards, > > Jeremy D. Miller > The Shade Tree Developer <http://codebetter.com/blogs/jeremy.miller> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > ------------------------------ > *From:* Paul Batum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > *To:* fluent-nhibernate@googlegroups.com > *Sent:* Tuesday, December 9, 2008 1:03:25 AM > *Subject:* [fluent-nhib] My attempt to rewrite fluent nhibernate > > Today I checked in my current progress on a fluent nhibernate rewrite. I > wrote a blog post with more information: > http://www.paulbatum.com/2008/12/fluent-nhibernate-rewrite.html > > You can view the commit log here: > http://code.google.com/p/fluent-nhibernate/source/detail?r=143 > > The branch is here: > http://fluent-nhibernate.googlecode.com/svn/branches/pb-rewrite > > This shouldn't mean much for Fluent NHibernate users at the moment, as it > is nowhere near being as functional as the trunk. However I would really > like some feedback from the Fluent NHibernate devs. Does it look like it is > worth pursuing further? Can you imagine us switching to it eventually? Did I > miss Chad's point > <http://groups.google.com/group/fluent-nhibernate/msg/57f151b4c047eab5?hl=en>completely > and am doing it all wrong? Comments and criticisms all welcome. > > Thanks, > > Paul Batum > > > > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Fluent NHibernate" group. To post to this group, send email to fluent-nhibernate@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/fluent-nhibernate?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
