jankyBlog

Chissà perché mi fischiano le orecchie.
È dalla PDC che continuo a dire che secondo me DLinq è un DAL e non un ORM, ma mi davano del pazzo e la gente scrollava la testa alla fine della sessione di Hejlsberg.

Più recentemente ho stra-rotto qui:
http://groups.google.com/group/microsoft.public.it.dotnet.asp/msg/a62059cc734e9072?hl=en&

Per me è un'ottima idea prima di tutto per un motivo: eliminare le differenze tra il type system di .net e del db. Fatto questo il mapping tra le classi di DLinq e quelle dell'object model le puoi anche fare via reflection in modo estremamente semplice.

I am sorry but this is a silly comment. Comparing NHibernate to ADO.NET vNext is like comparing apples to oranges.

Of course, I could have completely misunderstood you - my italian is quite terrible :-)

SM

I don't understand what are you referring to.
Anyway I agree and Giancarlo (as I discussed with him) agree with me ;-)

Sahil:
This post it was a bit provocative, and specially direct to those persons who think that Ado.net vNext is "the ORM" of Microsoft house.
Hence I think indeed in a strategic use of two frameworks (converter of query Dlink in Nhibernate HQL that would carry the power of syntax control in compilation time, for example).

You have done well to specify that Ado.net and NH are not the same thing.
Both me and Raffaele, we agree with you. We have spoken a long time ago of it.

Thanks Sahil,and thanks Raf!

So my italian is indeed terrible :-)

I think we have no disagreement then. Almost every talk I have given on ADO.NET vNext, some guy in the audience asks "So why not NHibernate?".

NH != ADO.NET vNext

:-)

SM

ok