Paul Gielens:ThoughtsService

Yeah and what they didn't mention was that the chances of your logical and conceptual models being the same is about the same as finding a hot bikini model who also programs in C++.

I have to disagree. We have been very successful with Neo on projects which is incapable of handling indirections between the two models. Our "start with the model" approach saved us many times. Sure, we had to hand optimize one or two use cases and our denormalized databases would upset a typical DBA ;)

Well, even in trivial projects, your ERD looks very different from your EDM. So I am not sure how DLINQ (LINQ to SQL) alone would be good enough for your purposes. :-/

But well if you say so, we just have to agree to disagree.

There are still plenty of unanswered Q's about vNext in general. Right now it feels like a good "concept" they are playing with - but it needs way more thought and panning out before release, or even a decent Beta.

We'll see where it goes :)

SM

While I agree that there are scenarios that you can get away with a 1-1 mapping I question why anyone would lock themselves into that coupling rather then going with Linq to Entities and allowing the conceptual model to evolve independently of the relational model.

I think Linq to Sql should be merged into Linq to Entities and we should get a single mapping solution that handles either direct mappings or more complex mappings.  As your system evolves you can start to use the more advanced features of Entities.  If on the other hand things don't change and you keep everything mapped directly, well, you're no worse off.

两种的特性： Feature ...

两种的特性： Feature LINQtoS...