On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 11:27 AM, MB Software Solutions General Account
> Tell me again why they couldn't make it easy to link the datasets to the
> objects like Foxpro made it easy??
--
Datasets were the first attempt in .Net 1.3,
Ed Leafe wrote:
> On Nov 6, 2008, at 11:27 AM, MB Software Solutions General Account
> wrote:
>
>> Tell me again why they couldn't make it easy to link the datasets to
>> the
>> objects like Foxpro made it easy??
>
> Because they didn't want to make it look like Dabo? ;-)
LOL!
On Nov 6, 2008, at 11:27 AM, MB Software Solutions General Account
wrote:
> Tell me again why they couldn't make it easy to link the datasets to
> the
> objects like Foxpro made it easy??
Because they didn't want to make it look like Dabo? ;-)
-- Ed Leafe
__
Stephen Russell wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 3:14 AM, Alan Bourke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>> On Wed, 5 Nov 2008 16:13:43 -0600, "Stephen Russell"
>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>> A good comparison of what the EF is to be and what Linq already is.
>>>
>> If only there were an easy-to-use ORM f
On Thu, 6 Nov 2008 05:37:54 -0600, "Stephen Russell"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> Have you thought of making the mapper yourself?
I thought about doing one for nHibernate (or was it Wilson OR?) but
who's got the time :)
--
Alan Bourke
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 3:14 AM, Alan Bourke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 5 Nov 2008 16:13:43 -0600, "Stephen Russell"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>>
>> A good comparison of what the EF is to be and what Linq already is.
>>
>
> If only there were an easy-to-use ORM for .Net that really wor
On Wed, 5 Nov 2008 16:13:43 -0600, "Stephen Russell"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
>
> A good comparison of what the EF is to be and what Linq already is.
>
If only there were an easy-to-use ORM for .Net that really worked well
with OLE DB data sources like VFP. They're all centered round SQL
Serve
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 7:32 AM, Stephen Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 6:14 AM, Tracy Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I attended a .NET meeting in Asheville, NC last month.
>> "Developer Centric Features of SQL Server 2008 by Kevin Boles who is an
>> independent S
On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 6:14 AM, Tracy Pearson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I attended a .NET meeting in Asheville, NC last month.
> "Developer Centric Features of SQL Server 2008 by Kevin Boles who is an
> independent SQL Consultant and SQL Server expert as well as a SQL MVP."
>
> It's focus was ma
I attended a .NET meeting in Asheville, NC last month.
"Developer Centric Features of SQL Server 2008 by Kevin Boles who is an
independent SQL Consultant and SQL Server expert as well as a SQL MVP."
It's focus was mainly on SQL. One of the big points Kevin gave was using
LINQ against Stored Proc
, 2008 11:09 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [NF] LINQ - RIP?
Im just getting a handle on .NET and started looking at LINQ. didnt
like it so glad I can ignore it. Then again I looked at EF. Dont
understand it so that doesnt sound like an advantage either.
At 08:27 PM 4/11/2008, you wrote:
>
Im just getting a handle on .NET and started looking at LINQ. didnt
like it so glad I can ignore it. Then again I looked at EF. Dont
understand it so that doesnt sound like an advantage either.
At 08:27 PM 4/11/2008, you wrote:
>In terms of take-up, Linq is still a minnow - it's no COM or OLEDB.
In terms of take-up, Linq is still a minnow - it's no COM or OLEDB. In
that sense deprecating it has less of an impact even though it's
exasperating to have to evaluate a whole new ball of wax in the Entity
Framework. They need to rein themselves in and get a bit of focus
instead of trying to cover
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 1:18 PM, Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So it's a new version of linq then. Not a new thing and byebye linq ?
--
Linq is really 3 different products. Objects, XML and SQL would be
their names, and the direction of what the query w
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 2:18 PM, Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So it's a new version of linq then. Not a new thing and byebye linq ?
>From my understanding from those who actually read TFA and care, LINQ
for SQL is like to be discouraged and then discontinued in favor of
the Entity Framework.
So it's a new version of linq then. Not a new thing and byebye linq ?
Al
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Stephen Russell
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 6:41 PM
---
My co workers who went to PDC last week o
One old one that comes to mind is network dde. I had that working a treat.
Then it went and nothing was easy :)
Al
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of MB Software Solutions,LLC
Allen wrote:
> Makes you wonder sometimes if Microsoft technology
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 11:19 AM, MB Software Solutions, LLC
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Allen wrote:
>> Makes you wonder sometimes if Microsoft technology is worth following. As
>> soon as you get used to it or find it even its dead.
>> Bloody stupid
>> Al
>
>
> Certainly an argument could easily
Ted Roche wrote:
>
> Evolution is good, although you might not think so if your name were T. Rex.
>
> Change is good if it progresses in the right direction, but change for
> change sake ("this year , with tailfins!") is just bilking the
> customer without delivering real value.
>
> It's not bad
Allen wrote:
> Makes you wonder sometimes if Microsoft technology is worth following. As
> soon as you get used to it or find it even its dead.
> Bloody stupid
> Al
Certainly an argument could easily be made for this---Windows DNA comes
to mind.
When I read Richard's email, I had to laugh as I
On Mon, Nov 3, 2008 at 8:02 AM, Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Makes you wonder sometimes if Microsoft technology is worth following. As
> soon as you get used to it or find it even its dead.
> Bloody stupid
Evolution is good, although you might not think so if your name were T. Rex.
Change
On Nov 3, 2008, at 7:02 AM, Allen wrote:
> Makes you wonder sometimes if Microsoft technology is worth
> following. As
> soon as you get used to it or find it even its dead.
> Bloody stupid
Ah, but *this* time it will be different!
-- Ed Leafe
_
: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [NF] LINQ - RIP?
From the Database Weekly newsletter from SQLServerCentral.com...
Editorial - Dead LINQ - Database Weekly (Nov 3, 2008)
There might be lots of DBAs holding their hands up in thanks over the
news that LINQ-> SQL might be d
From the Database Weekly newsletter from SQLServerCentral.com...
Editorial - Dead LINQ - Database Weekly (Nov 3, 2008)
There might be lots of DBAs holding their hands up in thanks over the
news that LINQ-> SQL might be dead.
I saw a number of blog posts that referred to this note from the ADO
24 matches
Mail list logo
