Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Code Project
  1. Home
  2. General Programming
  3. C#
  4. Anyone else using ADO.Net 2.0, stored procedures and wcf for databinding rather than using another framwork?

Anyone else using ADO.Net 2.0, stored procedures and wcf for databinding rather than using another framwork?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved C#
csharpdatabaseasp-netbusinesshtml
5 Posts 3 Posters 0 Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • T Offline
    T Offline
    ToddHileHoffer
    wrote on last edited by
    #1

    I know that LINQ, Entity Model and RIA Services (when it is available) are great and all, but I find that all the extrapolation makes me stupid and makes it harder to solve problems. I know it takes a few extra hours to write your own classes that represent your database objects, but I like the having the extra control. One of the things that kills me about ASP.Net MVC is that MS tells us one of the benefits is the granular control over the HTML. Well, I kind of like having the granular control over my database transactions. I also find that it is an important skill in the business world to be good at writing SQL. Being able to easily adhoc query your databases is also very important. I know it is a bit of extra work, but frankly I prefer to program that way. Anyone else agree with me?

    I didn't get any requirements for the signature

    D P 2 Replies Last reply
    0
    • T ToddHileHoffer

      I know that LINQ, Entity Model and RIA Services (when it is available) are great and all, but I find that all the extrapolation makes me stupid and makes it harder to solve problems. I know it takes a few extra hours to write your own classes that represent your database objects, but I like the having the extra control. One of the things that kills me about ASP.Net MVC is that MS tells us one of the benefits is the granular control over the HTML. Well, I kind of like having the granular control over my database transactions. I also find that it is an important skill in the business world to be good at writing SQL. Being able to easily adhoc query your databases is also very important. I know it is a bit of extra work, but frankly I prefer to program that way. Anyone else agree with me?

      I didn't get any requirements for the signature

      D Offline
      D Offline
      Dr Walt Fair PE
      wrote on last edited by
      #2

      I still write my own data object classes, etc. For one thing, I have a lot of code and objects that were developed long before Linq, etc. that are still in use. Maybe I'm just missing something, but I don't see where Linq, etc. save me much work.

      CQ de W5ALT

      Walt Fair, Jr., P. E. Comport Computing Specializing in Technical Engineering Software

      T 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • T ToddHileHoffer

        I know that LINQ, Entity Model and RIA Services (when it is available) are great and all, but I find that all the extrapolation makes me stupid and makes it harder to solve problems. I know it takes a few extra hours to write your own classes that represent your database objects, but I like the having the extra control. One of the things that kills me about ASP.Net MVC is that MS tells us one of the benefits is the granular control over the HTML. Well, I kind of like having the granular control over my database transactions. I also find that it is an important skill in the business world to be good at writing SQL. Being able to easily adhoc query your databases is also very important. I know it is a bit of extra work, but frankly I prefer to program that way. Anyone else agree with me?

        I didn't get any requirements for the signature

        P Offline
        P Offline
        PIEBALDconsult
        wrote on last edited by
        #3

        I always write my own SQL and I have found very little use for "entities" in my work and I can imagine few cases where they may be beneficial, so I expect that they are over-used (an anti-pattern). I was discussing this with a colleague the other day. The bottom line, to me, is the duration of the object -- will it last long enough to warrant spending time and effort creating it? And will it interact with other objects? If the answers to these questions are both "yes", then go right ahead and use an object. If not, why bother? Let's put it this way... if all you're doing is querying data and writing it to a file (a simple list of customers for instance) then I see no point in bothering with instantiating an object for each customer just to dispose it immediately. P.S. I don't do stored procedures, I don't do WCF, I don't do databinding.

        T 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • D Dr Walt Fair PE

          I still write my own data object classes, etc. For one thing, I have a lot of code and objects that were developed long before Linq, etc. that are still in use. Maybe I'm just missing something, but I don't see where Linq, etc. save me much work.

          CQ de W5ALT

          Walt Fair, Jr., P. E. Comport Computing Specializing in Technical Engineering Software

          T Offline
          T Offline
          ToddHileHoffer
          wrote on last edited by
          #4

          Walt Fair, Jr. wrote:

          Maybe I'm just missing something, but I don't see where Linq, etc. save me much work.

          Agreed.

          I didn't get any requirements for the signature

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • P PIEBALDconsult

            I always write my own SQL and I have found very little use for "entities" in my work and I can imagine few cases where they may be beneficial, so I expect that they are over-used (an anti-pattern). I was discussing this with a colleague the other day. The bottom line, to me, is the duration of the object -- will it last long enough to warrant spending time and effort creating it? And will it interact with other objects? If the answers to these questions are both "yes", then go right ahead and use an object. If not, why bother? Let's put it this way... if all you're doing is querying data and writing it to a file (a simple list of customers for instance) then I see no point in bothering with instantiating an object for each customer just to dispose it immediately. P.S. I don't do stored procedures, I don't do WCF, I don't do databinding.

            T Offline
            T Offline
            ToddHileHoffer
            wrote on last edited by
            #5

            I agree with you. I do use stored procedures, but I don't really need to. I don't really like databinding either.

            I didn't get any requirements for the signature

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            Reply
            • Reply as topic
            Log in to reply
            • Oldest to Newest
            • Newest to Oldest
            • Most Votes


            • Login

            • Don't have an account? Register

            • Login or register to search.
            • First post
              Last post
            0
            • Categories
            • Recent
            • Tags
            • Popular
            • World
            • Users
            • Groups