2 ms·

You've succeeded in convincing me you that you have limited experience and an inability to see that the real world is much messier than your ideals. Do please

You've succeeded in convincing me you that you have limited experience and an inability to see that the real world is much messier than your ideals. Do please stop trying to speak for .Net as if you represent the entire community, you don't, and you're just embarrassing yourself. In the real world, the corporate world, you'll find tons and tons of custom active record implementations because they always provide something external mapping libraries don't, context aware simplicity. So go pick up a Martin Fowler book on patterns and read what someone who actually knows what they're talking about says about it since you seem to think you've got it all figured out, it's obviously pointless trying to have a discussion with you.

mythz 10y ago
LOL, then you're as clueless as evaluating people as you are evaluating technology. If you think mechanically forcing the creation of unnecessary non-reusable classes eschews simplicity you have no idea about that either no matter how many pattern books you want to try hide behind - BTW if you had any clue about Martin Fowler you'd know he'd never reuse Active Records as DTO's (pretty embarrassing given you've started quoting him - go read up on his published DTO, Facade and Gateway patterns). But you're right there's no point in a discussion, you're stuck in your legacy ways (a .NET 1.0 API for your ideal theoretical .NET AR DAL really?) and can't see the approaches .NET has rightfully moved to - there's a reason you'd need to NIH your own DAL to get "your ideal API" you want (hint: it's not because it's an undiscovered ingenuity) - have fun NIH'ing your own tech debt!