LINQ features

Published 15 September 5 9:51 AM | Ramon Smits
I was just browsing a bit to get more information about LINQ. Our fellow blogger Joshua already posted something about it.

LINQ seems very usable. The old c omega project is transformed into LINQ so those guys that did that R&D project have a nice salary now ;-)

So we have DLINQ for dataaccess to do easier selects etc. but I am wondering if I would want to do my DB access this way. I think that I don't want to do this. The other dataaccess relating thing I noted is the O/R mapper attributes in the overview document. Haven't seen good samples with this but if the LINQ library has logic like some O/R mappers like creating optimized dataaccess queries then this could become a hit. I really dive into this topic to get to know the details.

XLINQ is for the xml integration within your code. The samples that I've seen only show things about xml document creation. What would be a very interesting thing if is XLINQ has support for xsl-t within your code and to easily do thing within that xsl-t that require c# of vb.net code so that you don't have to call another method but can merge xsl-t and c# code to walk through your xml document.

The bad thing is that I also saw afwul samples about anonymous types. I don't think that you want to write those classes by hand. It is only interesting for run-time creation of certain object types. I think all options within LINQ rely heavily on this feature. Why on earth would a developer want to create such classes? Hard to understand, hard to maintain and the fucking code police will drop you from the 10th floor head down!

Barry Garving has created a nice LINQ Resources post.
Filed under: ,

Comments

# Erwyn van der Meer said on September 15, 2005 12:24 AM:

Anonymous types rock! They are really useful (I would even say needed) for projecting out relevant fields/properties in the select of the query.

# Nathan Pledger said on September 15, 2005 5:15 AM:

I'm inclined to agree with Ramon.

For years we have been told about the various ways we can abstract our data and produce more professional and robust code. Surely, this is undo-ing all of this.

I can only see a need for the XSL-T transformations "inline" without the necessity of talking to System.Xml.

# Chi Wai Man said on September 16, 2005 5:40 PM:

I'm asking the same question to myself. I don't think I will code my stored procedures in Linq unless I have to build up a dynamic query.

I was blast away when I saw the channel 9 presentation from andre:). Linq = cool