There is another way to go, when talking about Persistence Ignorance. I define all my model entities as interfaces in a separate assembly.
I have a "code generator " specific for each storage that takes care of all the plumbing for me: 1) generates the classes as the storage wants them : NH virtual methods, primary keys, 2) NH mappings 3) registeres the implementation classes with the interfaces so they are accessible from my IOC Advantages: the model is not poluted in any way: no attributes, no id properties, no reference to any ORM if i have to change something regarding to persistence i do that in one place, but not in my "model" Regarding rules and validations: i use my own rules engine that is specified against interfaces and "weaved" at runtime. Regarding : code it yourself advice, this is the biggest pain in the **** with open source projects that do not have the guts to take documentation to the level it will make it easy for other folks to understand and help the project grow. On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 9:52 AM, Liviu U <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There is another way to go, when talking about Persistence Ignorance. > > I define all my model entities as interfaces in a separate assembly. > I have a "code generator " that takes care of all the plumbing for me: > 1) generates the classes as the storage wants them : NH virtual > methods, primary keys > > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 4:02 AM, Sidar Ok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> inline, having played with the POCO adapter for EF, my 2 cents would be do >> not use it, and not let any of your good friends do so. Seriously, PI is not >> that important to create 3 levels of mapping just to achieve it. (even the >> built in 2 makes me choke, but that's even another inline discussion) >> >> On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 1:56 AM, Nathan Stott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>> If EF is the future, then I don't want to see tomorrow. >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 5:50 PM, Fabio Maulo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> > 2008/10/7 MAMMON <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >> >>> >> With a lot of Entity Framework buzz being generated recently, due to >>> >> it's v1 release with VS2008 SP1, the term Persistence Ignorance has >>> >> been climbing the Google ranks ladder. Indeed, a Google search of the >>> >> term shows that of the top 5 results, 3 are about the Entity >>> >> Framework. Since I work in an otherwise all Microsoft shop, I am very >>> >> interested in the EF, and the recent buzz has caused me to think more >>> >> about Persistence Ignorance. Out of the box, EF doesn't have it, but >>> >> someone at MS has created a PI POCO adapter for EF v1. >>> > >>> > Please don't compare NH with EF. >>> > You can't compare 4 crazy dogs with a monster as Microsoft. >>> > Give us the same funds, or a part of it, and then we can make some >>> > comparison. >>> > BTW EF is the future because Microsoft (the word Microsoft don't need >>> > any >>> > other explication), and NH is the present. >>> > 2 >>> > weeks ago, for a new project, I have proposed LINQ2SQL in a company >>> > (yes, I have proposed LINQ2SQL) but that company said NO even if that >>> > project will work only with MSSQL. They choose NH. >>> > >>> > I don't want to talk for Ayende but... when some big OSS developer say >>> > you >>> > "write your own" or "patch it" it is because the day have only 24hours >>> > and >>> > who write code for free need help to solve all issues. >>> > Without the help of the community the OSS can't live forever. >>> > -- >>> > Fabio Maulo >>> > >>> > > >>> > >>> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Sidar Ok >> http://www.sidarok.com >> >> >> >> > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "nhusers" group. To post to this group, send email to nhusers@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/nhusers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
