|
Posted by steve on 11/08/07 05:28
Hello Ed,
Your participation is appreciated.
There is a general misconception about what I'm publishing.
I'm not playing the mousetrap game. As in here what your doing
is silly use this. All I'm doing is trying to put a proof of concept
out in the hopes that it will strike a cord with developers and even
more importantly strike a cord in a major vendor to pursue these
ideas. After all the ideas in net trumped any notion of a migration
hardship.
All I can do is give you different slices of these ideas. There
is no one reason for doing anything, but a cumulative batch of
evidence is another story.
To most of the sql community all that 'theory' stuff is just
for classroom exercise. I'm trying to show what that 'theory'
stuff actually looks like. The rush to code in sql has always
outpaced the thought of what's really behind it. I'm trying
for a little more balance:)
As for an access layer like linq what is the real point? No
matter what linq is or what it can do where does it end up?
It ends up in sql server. And that is the problem:) Rather
than spend the effort to placate net users who want as little
to do with sql and sql coding as possible why not bring a database
itself in line with the net environment. If you do that your talking
about a new type of database. Your talking a relational db
and that's what my stuff is trying to describe.
Regards,
steve
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|