Hi Fabio, i am not a team member but i will also give you my opinion.
I like it!
* It dose not use the context less fluent classes (which meens
map.Class(..).Property(...).Property(...))
* It is clean and not polluted with Of,For and all this useless words
* It follows the XML mapping name schema, which is my main criticism on
FluentNhiberate because its much harder to use for beginners and i can
not directly infer from NHibernate's documentation to corresponding the
fluent mapping.
-Steve
On 13.01.2010 07:08, Fabio Maulo wrote:
Hi team.
I would like to have a code re-view of my last post and
a constructive feedback
http://fabiomaulo.blogspot.com/2010/01/map-nhibernate-using-your-api.html
<http://fabiomaulo.blogspot.com/2010/01/map-nhibernate-using-your-api.html>The
post, and overall the code, is basically an example about how implement a
custom API to create mappings by code.
That is an invitation to everybody want create his own API and even an
invitation for FNH team to use the Hbm* classes instead generate XML.
That said, seeing how things are going in each framework, NH needs its own m
apping-by-code.
Two matters here:
1) API definition
2) usage of Hbm* or directly create metadata (classes of namespace
NHibernate.Mapping)
What is clear is that our implementation will supports anything supported by
XML and, probably, we will improve some of actual "conventions-interceptors"
(as, for instance, INamingStrategy& Co. ).
