On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 09:22, Frans Bouma <[email protected]> wrote:

> > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On
> Behalf
> > On Tue, Aug 17, 2010 at 03:58, Frans Bouma <[email protected]> wrote:
> >              2) it's doing work that's unnecessary, as you're testing
> work
> > which
> >       can be done by a machine which doesn't make mistakes.
> >
> > Did you read the part where I say this is autogenerated?
>
>         Generated by what exactly?
>

A script.


> >       > How would FNH help me here?
> >
> >              it at least makes sure names etc. match.
> >
> > That's what the first test is for.
>
>         which runs at runtime, and you catch the errors thus after
> compilation. I don't see the 'benefit' of errors which are only catchable
> OUTSIDE compilation cycles.
>

Test is not runtime. We seem to have a fundamentally different undestanding
of what the build process is.


>
> >       >  ...Except FNH does not have a "validation pipeline". It relies
> on
> NH's    XML
> >       > input.
> >
> >              pipeline == code generation engine. So the same input always
> >       generates the same XML. This is a good thing because you then just
> have to
> >       focus on the input.
> >
> > I've said it 100 times in this thred: what's the value in a 1-1
> > "generation"???????????
> > I don't need a C# -> XML "generator", I can write XML myself.
>
>         You can't, actually. You're human, you WILL make mistakes. A format
> which is compile time checked and which is used as input for generating XML
> is superior, as you already catch the cruft you have to test for at
> runtime.
>
>
>        XML is human readable, and machine writable. Just because you can
> type it in some editor doesn't mean you should.
>

XML is neither less nor more human readable/writable than C#.
Forgive me if I prefer IDEs that assist me with writing text to visual tools
like the one you sell. I am more productive with the former.


> >              auto-mapping... ah, isn't that the mechanism which is used
> by
> people
> >       who are so against db-first, but at the same time are doing just
> that?
> >
> > WHAT? 8-O
> > Automapping is model-first runtime code generation.
>
>         oh? so, when you change some classes, it will... work on your DB?
> Oh, you have to trash the db, so how are you going to 'maintain' things in
> production then?
>

Change scripts.

  Diego

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"nhusers" 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/nhusers?hl=en.

Reply via email to