LINQ to SQL seemed so promising... of course there were quite a lot of quirks here and there, but promising nonetheless. BUT, it lacks support for Value Objects. I don't even have a decent
workaround, because it won't work decently with querying... However, it might be that something can be done with the expression tree to solve the problem, but...
To give a quick and simple example of what I mean, I find it common that I would like to have Customer and Address as two different classes, but as one table (Customers) in the database. Another simple example,
assume that your Order has a Price object and the Price object has a Discount object. In the database, there is just an Orders table...
I was looking forward to a solution out of the box from MS, since I thought that would lead to a wide interest in DDD. To me, the problem with Value Objects is a show stopper, but it might
not be that big of a problem for everyone.
The Entity Framework, you ask? Well, I dont know too much about it but it looks to be a giant thing. I'm a bit allergic to giant things, and they seem to be a long way from
PI at this
point. They have even invented something they call IPOCO which is miles away from PI in my opinion, more like anti-PI... So not even the stuff after Orcas seems to be what I need... Why?
Previous Topic
