Dear all
I recently wrote my own ORM system (long story). It is basic but very
effective. It has no known bugs, but few of the features of a
sophisticated ORM tool like xHibernate. I do think it could be
extended to have more features if that were required but it has never
been necessary.
My starting point was to use metadata for mapping the relationships,
stating the relationship between each entity class's properties and
the corresponding columns in the DB as attributes, like so
[DataColumn("ID", SqlTypes.Int16), PrimaryKey]
public int ID { get; set; }
This also allowed me to declare custom type converters for marshalling
types from my Oracle DB to .Net (eg converting 0/1 to boolean T/F
where the Oracle SPs returned NUMBER values).
I have three questions for the group.
Question (1): does Fluent Hibernate provide anything like this as a
mapping strategy?
If not.....
Question (2): is it a bad idea in absolute terms? Can anyone think of
a killer argument against it as a design pattern (nearest comparison
without betters samples/screenshots is the DataContract pattern in
WCF).
Question (3): if everyone does like the idea, how do people feel about
adding it to Fluent NHibernate or branching to create a new product
called something like Meta NHibernate?
Please note that the answer to question (2) is not that it is harder
to pronounce....
Looking forward to any comments anyone may have.
Alex
--
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
fluent-nhibernate+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/fluent-nhibernate?hl=en.
