3 ms·

I feel your pain. Especially on the .NET side. A general history of CRUD in .NET: - Basic ADO.NET (Not too different from JDBC/ODBC, direct commands) - Firs

I feel your pain. Especially on the .NET side. A general history of CRUD in .NET: - Basic ADO.NET (Not too different from JDBC/ODBC, direct commands) - First Gen ORMs; Linq2Sql (functional but only on SQL server, and missing some features) - Entity Framework (4-6) /NHibernate. Lots of people wound up hating this, so they went to - Dapper. Dead simple; Takes SQL and only maps the results back. Everyone loves it.... Similar abstractions are created over Linq (linq2db, SqlFu) as well, with less (but happier) adoption. - EF Core is released. Everyone switches back over again. The whole thing is silly.

partyboat1586 6y ago
Yeah, all the churn costs more time and resources than it saves. I personally just stayed with Dapper, simple and flexible. I think people have a problem with judging tech based on any benefit rather than cost benefit analysis. People also value cuteness and elegance in doing 'common' tasks over conceptual simplicity and a similar degree of ugliness for all operations.