Are RecordSet objects deprecated in the .Net 4.5 Framework? If so, is it possible to include them in a .Net 4.5 Framework project by referencing them?
From my reading, I understand them to be deprecated. I also understand that if your "target" framework is higher than that of the desired reference, the reference cannot be included in your solution (the IDE, e.g. Visual Studio 2013, will not allow the inclusion).
I am looking for a definitive, simple answer as none seem to be available elsewhere (though there are certainly troves of information on the web about RecordSet and DataSet). Again, my question is not how to use RecordSet, but rather whether it is deprecated and - if so - how to include in a .Net 4.5 Framework solution (which I am under the impression is not possible).
If you are able to attach any references, that would be awesome. I am either trying to prove me "wrong" or someone else "wrong".
Here is one of the references I have found that seems to suggest RecordSets aren't really a part of the .Net piece.
There has never been a type named "RecordSet" in the .NET Framework. That name was taken, a COM type that had its hay days in the 1990s. Part of DAO and ADO, COM object models that made it easy to access data. And found its way into plenty of .NET programs, stuck on data providers of the 1990s or injected by code originally written in VB6 or VBA, the most popular programming tools in the 90s.
No, it is alive and well, ADO is not deprecated. DAO got the axe 13 years ago when Jet was removed from the standard distribution. Albeit that it seems to be not quite dead, it is still included with every current Windows version. Microsoft code never dies. COM interop in .NET 4.5, what you use under the covers to consume the ADODB type library, has not changed at all.
There was an ill-fated attempt to make ADO more compatible with 64-bit code, fixing a bug in the type library. Released in Windows 7 SP1, it caused wide-spread dismay and misery so was canceled again. Hopefully you don't have that viral problem.
Otherwise typical of software, it is not like fine wine, it does not age gracefully. Still using Recordset today does not make sense, you'd at least consider uplifting to the System.Data.Oledb namespace. Which is the managed .NET wrapper around ADO.
Related
I've been dealing with EF in my project for 5+ years. It's database-first and because of huge overhead migration to DbContext will result in, I'm still dancing with ObjectContext.
It is nice to see improvements of runtime performance delivered in each release, though we all know that last official release is missing view generation mechanisms because of mapping api been hidden. This is fine for relatively simple entity models, but I'm having a complex one, warm up time is not acceptable.
I've installed 6.1 beta recently and it looks like generated views do the job, and I'm thinking of making it part of my project's next delivery.
My question is about 6.1 prerelease version: is it beta because of not everything from promised 6.1 backlog is done(were, though, some things are completed and tested) or is it beta because everything to some extent, is still being developed?
I'm hoping for first case scenario and maybe someone can help me with figuring this out, any kind of feedback is welcome(don't tell me "beta is beta", I know :) ).
Thanks!
Like suggested by #abatishchev, I've installed EF 6.1.0 RTM instead.
I know Mono has no EF implementation, and no plans to create one.
Would it be possible, however, to simply take the relevant DLLs from .NET and add them into my Mono project in MonoDevelop? I may be completely misunderstanding how this is supposed to work; but wondered if this would then allow me to continue using EF + Mono rather than replacing the ORM.
Thanks.
For the Entity Framework on Mono status, see the mailing list post.
For the legal status, see Entity Framework license agreement. You are licensed to run Microsoft .Net on any legal copy of Windows, not on other operating systems. So even if this was technically possible, it would not solve your business problem. If you think now "what about ASP.NET MVC?" or something like that - those products are released by a different team and come with another license agreement that is much less restricted.
Since version 2.11.3 mono includes entity framework functionality.
Because of specifics of my current project, I have to keep using .NET 2.0. Are there any Entity Framework-like ORMs for .NET 2.0?
I'm absolutely OK with non-LINQ interface. Syntax like users.Where(u => u.Age > 100).Count() is fine.
I need to use DB-first approach: I already have a DB with about 30 tables and just considering the ways of simplifying work with it. So, I'd really appreciate if it's possible to generate the required code from existing DB.
It's also OK if it won't generate all the required code but provide the way to describe DB structure manually (using attributes, for instance). Basically, I just want to be able to build more or less sophisticated queries without messing with real SQL, SqlParameters and DataSets/DataTables with all these int.Parse(row[12].ToString()) (that's a legacy code I'm trying to get rid of)
Also, that would be great if I'm be able to "override" some particular "queries" with calls to existing stored procedures.
The most important is p.2 - DB first. Is there anything of this kind? Or am I absolutely wrong with my thoughts? Will appreciate any ideas.
Your best option is to check out NHibernate. Many (most?) people consider consider it more feature complete and powerful than EF 4.1, plus there are plenty of resources here on stackoverflow and the rest of the web to guide your development process.
Be sure to look into Fluent NHibernate to make mapping from your database to C# objects easy. The alternative of editing XML files is complex, clunky, and time consuming.
Note that you might need to use an older, but still completely functional, version of NHibernate that is compatible with .NET 2.0 (I think, but am not positive, that the more recent versions require .NET 3.5).
There is plenty of available ORMs but some of them are commercial (LLBLGen Pro). The good choice for you is probably NHibernate 2.1 (I think NHibernate 3.x requires .NET 3.5).
You should also thing about moving forward to a newer .NET version. Starting a new development on .NET 2.0 should be avoided and involving a new technology to existing old code base IMO spoils application's architecture and maintainability.
Edit:
So, I'd really appreciate if it's possible to generate the required code from existing DB.
The most important is p.2 - DB first.
ORM and code generation are two different areas. DB first doesn't mean code generation - it means mapping to existing database without needs to change the database. It is not point of ORM to generate code for you. The point of ORM is to allow you to map DB to classes and abstract querying. If the most important point for you is code generation you should look for something else then ORM. NHibernate doesn't have such code generation included but there are some additional projects which add similar features.
I have an existing app in which I made the mistake of using String.GetHashCode and persisting it to disk. Now that I'm upgrading the app to .Net 2.0 I find that that decision has come back to bite me in the butt.
I'm interested to know if anyone knows about a .Net 2.0 implementation of a .Net 1.1 compatible string hashing algorithm.
Obviously the best solution would be to buy myself a time machine and go back to 2002 and kick myself in the shin for even considering using the hashcode this way. Since that doesn't appear likely I'm looking for a workaround. I have existing users with this data on their systems so it's not possible for me to make one big conversion of the hashes or anything like that.
With the change to 2.0 I will update the code so it uses MD5 or SHA of course.
I considered extracting the String.GetHashCode source from Mono but since Mono is GPL and my app is commercial that really isn't an option. I don't even know if the Mono implementation is compatible with the MS .Net implementation since the contract for GetHashCode wouldn't require it to be compatible.
Any ideas?
You're not the only one, it seems: Getting .NET 1.1 CLR String Hash Codes In The .NET 2.0 CLR
That links to BackCompatibleStringComparer, which (allegedly, I can't verify) shows the implementation of the old GetHashCode().
I have been sold on the fun of using linq in areas other than pure database interaction. (See Calling fellow code nerds - Alternatives to Nested Loops?).
We are stuck on 2.0. I have told the powers that be about the ease of updating to 3.5 (we have already migrated to VS2008) but they are wanting a list of "benefits" for upgrading.
Can those that have experience in 3.5 help provide some talking points for the benefits of updating an existing app to 3.5?
UPDATE: Found an additional reason: Microsoft's inclusion of Charting tools for Asp.Net as a patch on top of 3.5! They get their business value, I get the fun...
Can YOU make a case for it? Sounds like you want it because LINQ is fun. Other people are mentioning features that are fun. I've always had a problem selling fun features to management because they aren't very compelling reasons to potentially disrupt an environment.
Honestly, it really depends on what you are using C# for. Are you a web developer, system admin, something else? Taking a general approach, I would use the following selling points (you will need to do some work to prove these things):
Zero-disruption for end-users when upgrading. Upgrading to the new version will be seamless and we will have a thoroughly reviewed test plan for updating all clients to this version. All of our old applications that require .NET 1.x or .NET 2.0 will still work perfectly.
Programmer Efficiency. You could mention how more of the Windows API is wrapped by .NET classes, thus making programmer more efficient because they don't have to P/Invoke as much. LINQ makes your more productive because of x, y, and z. Lambda expressions make you more productive because of x, y, and z.
Ease pains of future OS migration. Moving to WPF now will prepare us for Vista/Windows 7. We won't have to migrate applications using the now deprecated "Windows Forms" to WPF, because we will already be using it.
More applications purchased from 3rd parties will require it, so we will have to upgrade sooner or later.
In the end, you need to prove that at the very least, this move will not cost you money in terms of increased support or testing costs. If you can show it will make you be more productive and it will be a rather painless switch, then you will get your wish.
Maybe you should talk to some Java developers who are probably still forced to develop using 1.3 or 1.4 despite 1.5 being out for over 3 years and 1.6 for a couple... it appears platform consistency across the business is often of greater importance than the benefits of using the latest and greatest.
Also remember that 3.5 is just additional BCL libraries. You are still running on CLR 2.0. Same is true for 3.0. Usually when people find out that the underlying framework is the same and that you are just adding in new libraries they are more likely to go along with it.
You don't need .NET 3.5 to get LINQ or C# 3.0 features. You can implement your own LINQ for .NET 2.0. I am using C# 3.0 all over the place in my .NET 2.0 application. I don't know the full details on how to start the conversion process because I didn't set it up myself. This might be a good link for you: http://www.danielmoth.com/Blog/2007/05/using-c-30-from-net-20.html.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms171868.aspx
Transitioning onto 3.5 would help you reap the benefits/ features of:
LINQ to (Entities/ XML / Objects / Datasets etc ).
WCF, WF and WPF.
ASP.net MVC where MVC is kind of a de facto standard in other
platforms like Ruby/Python which
allow you pure HTML/ Javacript based
development.
ORM options with ADO.net Entity
Framework/ Linq to Sql
4.
With a few addons you can have
support for dynamic languages
like
IronPython/IronRuby.
Oh ya I almost forgot ADO.net Data Services..one of my fav.
These are the few benefits that immediately come to my mind.
In my experience, the addition of LINQ and Extension methods alone have made many previously arduous and/or time consuming tasks much easier and faster. The increased developer productivity from that alone is worth the upgrade effort IMHO.
Lambda expressions are awesome. There is no end to the places where I find that lambda expressions help me out in a very concise and readable way.
Automatic properties, while being a simple concept, really help making the code base smaller and clearer.
Also, I sencond the extension methods.
Before I even opened this question I had my answer: LINQ - it's one of the greatest extensions ever in .NET - I love it. It took me a few days to figure out, but now I've got it, I use it all over the place. The ability to query collections and arrays is worth the upgrade alone in my mind.
Decreased development time (and therefore increased ROI)
Less time wasted finding workarounds for .NET bugs that've been fixed in newer releases.
Extension methods for native types (in a similar fashion to JavaScript prototyping)
LINQ extensions - they take a couple of days to get your head around, but it's awesome!
LINQ to XML makes working with XML so much simpler
LINQ to objects/collections
A nice new 3.5 poster from Microsoft that you can pin up in your cubicle.
As a manager if I have a happier more productive team that is producing more in less time, then its a no brainer.
Ask yourself this: Will the developers be more effective and will their increased productivity actually increase benefit to the company or reduce corporate costs once you've considered the upgrade/transition/installation on the servers/additional testing etc? If the answer is truly yes, then do the upgrade and quit arguing about it.