ULinqGen Work Item Rss Feed

Created Issue: Command line access?

mcintyre321 — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 11:10:39 GMT

Hi there. I'd like to run your tool from the command line to fit in with my method of scripting changes to dbml files (see http://www.adverseconditionals.com/2008/05/introducing-linqtodbmlrunner.html). Is this possible?

COMMENTED ISSUE: Feature requests

benjamine — Wed, 07 May 2008 18:57:15 GMT

Guys, greate work. I hope you will keep it this way. I've just faced the same problems

Some suggestions for the code generator:

1. Avoid generating DbType, & Storage attributes to further reduce bloat.
2. Generate private fields without preceding "_" and in camelCase .
3. Add [Serializable] to the class, so it can be used with binaryFormatter / netdatacontract serializer.

Not sure about thesee two, but just thoughts:

4. Keep INotifyPropertyChanged - for perfomance & ease of change tracking on client?
5. Keep the code that ensures object graph consistency? It's a good thing? This could be done by using some kind of custom collection (possibly list or Collection<T> derivered)

And the last one, just an idea:

6. You can still provide lazy loading (when using custom collections) by reimplementing some kind of EntitySet / Ref and setting the source in a constructor. During serialization unloaded properties will return null (using the same trick as in LTS generated code) . I don't get why microsoft didn't do that. And this automatically will give lazy load on deserialized and attached entities.
Comments: ** Comment from web user: benjamine **

Thanks a lot, I'll try to answer these points:

* We're planning to add some type of configuration (e.g an optional xml associated to the .dbml) to allow specifying some of the things you propose (like change tracking), but always opt-in.

1. We need these attributes, AFAIK DbType is required to support the CreateDatabase() method, and we can cut that out. Storage tells the Linq Object Reader to set values directly on the private fields, bypassing the public setters (skipping "is modified" events). This is not only for performance, but also to allow change tracking.

2. This is tecnichally posible, but we don't wan't to force everybody a different syntax than the standard MS Linq Generator, If we decide to implement this, we'll make it configurable, and not the default.

3. If in the O/R Designer you choose Serialization Mode = "Unidirectional" the entities are decorated with [DataContract] and [DataMember] attributes, allowing them to be serialized with the NetDataContractSerializer, I haven't tested binary serialization, but AFAIK System.Linq.Binary (Linq type for TIMESTAMP) isn't Serializable (why!?). If not, we should try to find a workaround.

4. This is another thing we want to be opt-in.

5. To allow change tracking we're going to allow specification of a custom Collection<T> for associations, again, this will be opt-in, because we don't want to tie this Custom Tool to a particular Change Tracking implementation.

6. Like in 5. we're going to allow this by specifying your own Collection class.
(But we won't recommend this, mainly, because we don't want entities accessing (and knowing how to access!) a database or web service, and in a silent way. We prefer to make every access to the Dal, explicit.)

I'll further discuss this subjects with my teammates, and we'll apreciate any comments!

Kind Regards!

COMMENTED ISSUE: A Reserved Word in SQL leaves the brackets in the generated Code.

benjamine — Wed, 07 May 2008 18:10:31 GMT

I grabbed the code from the trunk yesterday afternoon.

[Table(Name="dbo.List")]
public partial class List
{
/* .... snip ... */
private string _[Desc];
/* .... snip ... */
[Column(Name="[Desc]", Storage="_[Desc]", DbType="VarChar(255)", CanBeNull=true, UpdateCheck=UpdateCheck.Never)]
public string Desc
{
get
{
return _[Desc];
}
set
{
_[Desc] = value;
}
}
/* .... snip ... */
}
Comments: ** Comment from web user: benjamine **

Thanks for the feedback!, and sorry for the delay... now I'm subscribed to Issue Tracker RSS Feed :)

CLOSED ISSUE: A Reserved Word in SQL leaves the brackets in the generated Code.

benjamine — Wed, 07 May 2008 18:07:46 GMT

CREATED ISSUE: Feature requests

agornik — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 17:30:52 GMT

CREATED ISSUE: A Reserved Word in SQL leaves the brackets in the generated Code.

djseng — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 16:10:52 GMT

COMMENTED ISSUE: Congrats on the first release

Korayem — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 17:39:20 GMT

Excellent work guys. I've been trying to get VS 2008 to regenerate the designer.cs file from a .dbml file but for some reason any new association that I add doesnt generate the corresponding code in designer.cs

I found my way to your tool, played around and I got it to generate a designer.cs like file from a single .dbml file. However, it used the original Database Column names instead of those I defined in the DBML. Can you make this in your future release?
Comments: ** Comment from web user: Korayem **

Excellent!! i am glad that I was of any aid ;)

I am downloading the current source code and playing with it

CLOSED ISSUE: Congrats on the first release

benjamine — Tue, 04 Mar 2008 19:57:20 GMT

COMMENTED ISSUE: Congrats on the first release

benjamine — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 12:18:01 GMT

Korayem,

You're absolutely right about this, we were ignoring the "Member" attribute of the dbml,
I will merge your attached code and upload it on the next ChangeSet,

Thanks for your kind collaboration and congrats!,

COMMENTED ISSUE: Congrats on the first release

Korayem — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 20:12:13 GMT

I took a look in your code and did some small modifications and now I am getting the results I expected.

If it wasn't for your good coding style, I wouldn't manage to modify the code. It took me less than 5 minutes ;)

COMMENTED ISSUE: Congrats on the first release

Korayem — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 20:07:09 GMT

For example, you genereted from the dbml file
[Column(Storage="_MEMBER_ID", DbType="Int NOT NULL IDENTITY", AutoSync=AutoSync.OnInsert, IsPrimaryKey=true, IsDbGenerated=true, UpdateCheck=UpdateCheck.Never)]
public int MEMBER_ID
{
get
{
return _MEMBER_ID;
}
set
{
_MEMBER_ID = value;
}
}

While what I was expecting was:
[Column(Name="M_NAME", Storage="_Username", DbType="NVarChar(75)")]
public string Username
{
get
{
return this._Username;
}
set
{
this._Username = value;
}
}

CREATED ISSUE: Congrats on the first release

Korayem — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 20:01:23 GMT