For what it's worth, it's the same argument that we'd use against Maps as the domain model, which we've been through (a thread almost as long and tedious as this one). ;-)
Obviously there are some significant design philosophy differences at work here. And that's okay. iBATIS is our philosophy, and is one worth protecting. My monthly bandwidth overcharge bills tell me that at least a few people agree with me.
Anyone with a different philosophy is welcome to comment and request features, but belaboring points such as this, and implicitly or explicitly "concluding" things of their own as Abdullah has done, inevitably becomes rude and a waste of time. It serves only to annoy and distract the rest of the list.
We've noted the feature request. But further design philosophy wars are out of scope for this list.
My apologies to the rest of the list for filling your inboxes with this.
Best regards,
Clinton
On 11/7/05, netsql <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Clinton, I agree, they don't feel right. Can you help me verbalize your
bellow statment.
Why is dataset or rowset a horrible design choice?
.V
Clinton Begin wrote:
>
> Datasets, rowsets, strongly typed or not are generally a horrible design
> choice and shouldn't be used in any sort of system that requires a
> maintainable object model that can exist with or without a database.
>
>
--
thx,
.V
Your Roomity Broadband Community < http://roomity.com/demo.jsp>
cell: 917 825 3035 in DFW
email: netsql at roomity.com
