Then came version 5, bringing support for enumerated and spatial types and table-valued functions, and was released in the same year, 2012.įinally, version 6 brought most of the stuff that mature ORMs support, such as interceptors, logging capabilities, custom conventions, support for stored procedures and asynchronous methods.īut then Microsoft started working on something new, and this had a profound impact on Entity Framework. The version was somewhat misleading, as it seemed to be a whole new version, but underneath, the “old” Entity Framework was still there.Īnother version 4.3, came out shortly which featured migrations, a welcome addition, but not one without its problems. Almost no mapping and configuration was required as it was based on conventions – things just worked out of the box. It was now much easier to start working with.
Using wufoo forms with bootstrap studio code#
It was only with version 4.1, popularly known as Code First, which happened in 2011, that things started to look interesting.Įntity Framework went through a big refactor, it seemed much more polished and clean, fully embracing POCOs and was code-centric. NET 4 in 2010 improved it a bit – with self-tracking entities with an eye for WCF, lazy loading, initial support for Plain-Old CLR Objects (POCOs), but people were still unsatisfied, even though it was then Microsoft’s recommended database access technology. The second version, now bumped to v4 to align with the release of. Some developers even issued a vote of no confidence ( ) to show how bad they felt about it. Entities had to inherit from a base class.It was complex to configure in Visual Studio – let alone XML configuration.Although it was touted that it supported other databases, it really only worked well with SQL Server.NHibernate had been around for some time and was quite popular back then. On one end, it was good to see Microsoft having a go at ORM, but there were already other products that could do the same and more. However it was received with mixed feelings. Visual Studio could reverse-engineer a database and produce a model for it. It was based on a provider model, so in theory it was able to support any relational database for which there was an ADO.NET Provider. It had features like multiple inheritance strategies, compiled queries, explicit loading, change tracking and other features that are commonly expected from an ORM. It featured both LINQ, a brand new toy back then – and something called Entity-SQL, an object-oriented SQL-alike dialect that never really caught up.
Using wufoo forms with bootstrap studio for free#
Subscribe to the DotNetCurry (DNC) Magazine for FREE and download all previous, current and upcoming editions. NET Core, MVC, Azure, Angular, React, and more.
Unlike Entity Framework, LINQ to SQL was only meant to support SQL Server.Īre you keeping up with new developer technologies? Advance your IT career with our Free Developer magazines covering C#, Patterns. During the same time, LINQ to SQL also came out, but Microsoft didn’t consider it to be an Object-Relational Mapper (O/RM). Entity Framework 1 was introduced back in 2008 with.
0 kommentar(er)
