Anonymous

My feedback

  1. 670 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    Check!
    (thinking…)
    Reset
    or sign in with
    • facebook
    • google
      Password icon
      I agree to the terms of service
      Signed in as (Sign out)
      You have left! (?) (thinking…)
      Anonymous commented  · 

      "How basic ORM functionality gets prioritized above the 40 or so people who seem to want store app or mobile support (which you seem to have started)?"

      Because it is basic ORM functionality and it should have been there from day 1.

      I find that most of the people using EF actually could have made it with Linq-To-SQL only. However one shouldn't forget that EF is an ORM, it is supposed to really shine in OO programs, and DDD designs.

      As such it is very surprising that this feature hasn't been there for so long. It is the basis for anyone creating an aggregate.

      I came up with a clean work around a few months ago that keeps the domain model intact and persistence ignorant, I'll post it. But it is positive that the EF team finally pays more attention to DDD scenarios...

      Anonymous commented  · 

      I agree with Vir, I'll move on NHibernate just because of this. My project uses DDD and I don't want to inject IStuffRepositories in my domain objects just to remove something from the collection. To me the purpose of an ORM if actually to avoid to have to do this kind of things.

      Anonymous supported this idea  · 

    Feedback and Knowledge Base