Basically intro, the Fluent Interface lets a lot of people still want total
control of there mappings through code rather than xml. Personally I want to
rid that pain from my life, so I wrote the automappings to sit ontop of the
current Fluent Interface.
The Convention GetPrimaryKeyName Chris correctly pointed out as being
unintuitive from an Auto mapping perspective, is very intuitive from a
manual mapping perspective. In my opinion since AutoMapper is piggy backing
on-top of the manual mapper is should attempt not to do anything to degrade
the experience of the manual mappings.
Basically that convention in the manual mapping is used to decide what the
name of the column should be.
For example
class Customer
{
public int PersonId {get; set;}
}
Hope that helps explain the situation.
Andy
On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 2:51 PM, Paul Batum <paul.ba...@gmail.com> wrote:
I think I'll call for Andrew to explain as he understands the automapping
> much better than I do. Hopefully I managed to give him the info he needed
> regarding the non-auto side of things.
>
>
> On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 1:29 AM, Ayende Rahien <aye...@ayende.com> wrote:
>
>> Sorry to jump in the middle, but what exactly is the problem?
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 12, 2008 at 9:25 AM, Paul Batum <paul.ba...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Fair enough. What if the AutoPersistenceModel simply initializes the
>>> Convention to use declaring/reflected type?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 12:25 AM, Chris Marisic <
>>> chrismari...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> It just seems like it would be really unintuitive which adds alot of
>>>> friction to automapping since even if your objects were perfect 1 to 1
>>>> mappings of your database tables except the Id column on your tables
>>>> includes the table name I think a person that would try FH would
>>>> become really frustrated for not being able to figure out how to map
>>>> the PK to be Type+"ID" unless it was somehow said very clearly or they
>>>> have done alot of work using PropertyInfo's to immediately think I can
>>>> resolve it up to the type of the object. But even with that, they
>>>> would need to try to figure out what the PropertyInfo actually even is
>>>> for PK. It just seems like there needs to be a more intuitive way
>>>> otherwise I'd be willing to bet you will see this question brought up
>>>> for the entire duration of FH.
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 11, 9:56 pm, "Paul Batum" <paul.ba...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Can you explain why using ReflectedType or DeclaringType (I haven't
>>>> thought
>>>> > carefully about which one should be used) is a "hack"? I was not
>>>> suggesting
>>>> > that it be used in the code base, rather than the user would specify
>>>> it if
>>>> > they were using the automapping.
>>>> >
>>>> > Perhaps I am still missing the point?
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> >
>
--
=================
I-nnovate Software - Bespoke Software Development, uk wirral.
http://www.i-nnovate.net
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Fluent NHibernate" group.
To post to this group, send email to fluent-nhibernate@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
fluent-nhibernate+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/fluent-nhibernate?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
