College + Computer Engineering = Carolyn Holmes

Very cool! Had seen several articles on it but this was a really nice way to dive into it and understand it better.
Wow 4 patent cubes! [looks around his cube and sees a Channel 9 guy.. ah well that'll do for the time being ]
Interesting...
i will definetly be checking this out.
Interesting. I wonder if LINQ, and therefore BLINQ, becomes less relevant when the database access layer is abstracted away from the ASP.Net front-end application via a SOA (using web services, for example). I haven't had a chance to look at the LINQ feature
set in detail, but it seems that a direct view into a given database is going to become less and less of a common thing to have at design time (for enterprise app development).
So, while it seems LINQ would be useful to me as a developer if my application was like...
Browser --> IIS --> .Net App_Code --> Database
...the reality is that my applications tend to be more like...
Browser --> IIS --> .Net App_Code --> Web Service Proxy --> Middle-tier Web Service Endpoint --> Middle-tier Business Logic (Java, C#, whatever) --> Data Abstraction Layer (e.g. Hibernate or other ORM) --> Database.
Is there a feature of LINQ that would serve a useful purpose in my more abstracted environment?
good interview and kewl tech.... My only concern is that some DBA somewhere will get the idea that they are all of a sudden a dev and BLINQ might end up becoming someone's solution to a business problem..... while that sounds great for the DBA's I can see me having a hard time explaining to the customer that after the magic from BLINQ that we aren't done yet....... excellent example tool but i see potential for abusing it.... plus i just watched a console app escentially do my job (ouch)......
I understand that was not the intention but as devs it's scary to watch automation carry into the things that used to once be the soul domain of devs and architects ..... the stuff that put food on our tables.... Lets just hope that the intended use is more often the case than the potential miss use......
As an ASP/ASP.Net dev i'm in the class that still wants a few things to be a mystery to rest of the world where just asking /? doesn't give all the answers....
hope that didn't all come off too negative, I just would like to know if this is the kind of stuff that gets talked about when things like this become reality?....
Minh wrote:Editing a customer ID lets you select from a pick-list of customer ID's?
I'm not sure if that's entirely useful.
But I'm definitely interested in the Ruby on Rail -ness of it. In addition to the Entity Layer's show yesterday, I like this trend.
Richard.Hein wrote:Angelfire said:
"I understand that was not the intention but as devs it's scary to watch automation carry into the things that used to once be the soul domain of devs and architects ..... the stuff that put food on our tables.... Lets just hope that the intended use is more often the case than the potential miss use......"
Automation is your friend!
It's way too late to turn back the hands of time; not to sound so melodramatic, but think about Ruby on Rails and Django, etc..., this is just the next step in web development and vital for .NET developers to compete.
I have already used BLINQ to generate a large website. The code is amazingly small and understandable to anyone who knows ASP.NET 2.0 and LINQ. I have never seen better than BLINQ personally, including Rails.
However it is still up to developers to work against that to meet all the business requirements - the pages are far from done is most cases. That's still a lot of work. Now you can focus on business programming, instead of technology programming, however.
I am just waiting for LINQ to be released to use it in earnest.
ubercoder, keeron, AlphaKahuna, and staceyw: Thanks, I'm glad you like it.
W3bbo: Yes, they're cereal. Makes for a great afternoon snack. Maybe I should have cleaned up a little before Charles came over, in retrospect.
Ang3lFir3: I hear your concerns, but hopefully great tools will let you focus less of your time on the drudgery of data manipulation and more on your webpage customizations and great new features. And then maybe you can go home earlier!
Polita
cbenard: LINQ and Blinq both support calling stored procedures. Try passing the /sprocs argument to Blinq and your stored procedures will show up as methods on the DataContext. You can then alter your static methods to call those sproc methods.
Polita
Most excellent video. Perhaps the rebel elements on this board will finally see the futility of "alternate" systems.
P.S. Padme?
Few questions
1. What are the pre-requisites
2. Will this need any of the new tools like .Net F/w 3.0, vista,.....
ANy help appreciated...
Add some Gift/Award to your "Provide Feedback" feature, then you can expect some real great response, else there will be less participation.
Speaking based off my experience.
schrepfler wrote:Looks very promising, what I object is that it's still data driven. You generate a new set of classes that abstract a database (which might be usefull), but why generate new classes if you already have your own set of the domain in question? I believe a coherent Model Driven solution should also exist and I guess with entities the true ORM nature should allow us to use our domain objects directly. At this point we can see a convergence between the approaches of both Java and .Net on persistence and object-relational mapping except that .Net integrates the queries directly in the language.
phuff wrote:Diego- DetailsView is already two-column: one for the field names and one for the field values. Is that not what you mean?
No Polita, sorry for the confusion. What I would need is a new kind of DetailsView control that would look like two of your current DetailsViews placed side by side. That would total four columns, but I guess you could generalize the idea to multi-column DetailsViews.
In my company we have been building a set of components and practices around ASP.NET 2.0 to accelerate the development of our own applications.
We like to use DetailsViews (and also GridViews) because they let us build user interfaces that work with only a few lines of code and very little markup. It is also nice that we don't need to buy third party components for decent user interfaces anymore.
However, a common complain has been that our DetailsView based pages look too sparse and do not take advantage of horizontal space.
Every time we have to resort to FormViews we don't like it because they need much more code and markup. It is also more difficult for the UI programmer to get the layout right.
Also, we have developed a few DataField controls that work inside DetailsViews and GridViews so we can sometimes avoid using TemplateFields, but we cannot use those controls inside a FormsView.
If we had a two (four) column DetailsView, we could get rid of FormViews almost completely.
There are other related issues of course. We cannot use multiple DetailsViews connected to the same DataSource, and at the same time having fields that are contiguous in the user interface but do not directly map to the same underlying DataSource is a common
hurdle.
Thank you for listening.
PS: I decided to submit this as a piece of feedback to
https://connect.microsoft.com/VisualStudio/feedback/ViewFeedback.aspx?FeedbackID=185387 (It is a shame that I cannot edit the original post there, cause it is a senseless mess).
cbenard wrote:Polita,
Thanks for the answer about using SPs with LINQ and Blinq. For clarification though, am I to understand that if you do standard LINQ queries like "from c in .... where .... select...." that it will not be optimized in SQL sql server? If I'm understanding that correctly, it is simply passing "select ... from ... where..." to SQL server as an ad hoc query if you're not calling SPs.
Thanks again.