5 ms·

This reminds me .NET's short lived Linq to SQL; There was a talk at the time, but I can't find the video: http://jaoo.dk/aarhus2007/presentation/Using+LINQ+to+

by yarg 2y ago

This reminds me .NET's short lived Linq to SQL; There was a talk at the time, but I can't find the video: http://jaoo.dk/aarhus2007/presentation/Using+LINQ+to+SQL+to+Access+Relational+Data http://jaoo.dk/aarhus2007/presentation/Using+LINQ+to+SQL+to+.... Basically, it was a way to cleanly plug SQL queries into C# code. It used this sort of ordering (where the constraints come after the thing being constrained); it needed to do so for IntelliSense to work.

dragonwriter 2y ago
> This reminds me .NET's short lived Linq to SQL; "Short lived"? Its still alive, AFAIK, and the more popular newer thing for the same use case, Linq to Enntities, has the same salient features but (because it is tied to Entity Framework and not SQL Server specific) is more broadly usable.
- yarg 2y ago
  It was in 3.5 only. If they've replaced it with something else in the last decade and a half that does not mean that they didn't get rid of it, or that it wasn't short lived. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/data/adonet/sql/linq/ https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/data/adon...
  - plusplusungood 2y ago
    LINQ is not the same as LINQ-to-SQL. The former is a language feature, the latter a library (one of many) that uses that feature.
    - yarg 2y ago
      Did you reply to the wrong person? Because I'm not the guy that didn't know that.
  - LeonB 2y ago
    Yeh. Linq to sql was a much more lightweight extension than EF, and was killed due to internal warring at MS. Database people were investing a lot of time and energy on doing things “properly” with EF, and this scrappy little useful tool, linq to sql, was seen as a competitor.
    - yarg 2y ago
      I quite liked it in the 5 minutes it existed - it was just really easy to use.
cyberax 2y ago
"Short-lived"? LINQ is very much alive in the C# ecosystem. And FROM-first syntax absolutely makes more sense, regardless of autocomplete. You should put the "what I need to select" after the "what I'm selecting from", in general.
- yarg 2y ago
  LINQ yes, but they killed off the component not long after introducing it.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - BartjeD 2y ago
    Linq to sql still lives
  - jiggawatts 2y ago
    It was replaced by Entity Framework.
neonsunset 2y ago
There is https://github.com/linq2db/linq2db https://github.com/linq2db/linq2db which is LINQ to SQL reincarnated. Of course there's EF Core too.
- WorldMaker 2y ago
  And NHibernate.Linq and Dapper.Extensions.Linq… Most ORMs in the ecosystem have at least one Linq support library, even if just a third-party extension. Also, there are fun things that support Linq syntax for non-ORM uses, too, such as System.Reactive.Linq and LanguageExt: https://github.com/louthy/language-ext/wiki/How-to-deal-with-side-effects#catch https://github.com/louthy/language-ext/wiki/How-to-deal-with...

by yarg 2y ago

dragonwriter 2y ago

> This reminds me .NET's short lived Linq to SQL; "Short lived"? Its still alive, AFAIK, and the more popular newer thing for the same use case, Linq to Enntities, has the same salient features but (because it is tied to Entity Framework and not SQL Server specific) is more broadly usable.

yarg 2y ago
It was in 3.5 only. If they've replaced it with something else in the last decade and a half that does not mean that they didn't get rid of it, or that it wasn't short lived. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/data/adonet/sql/linq/ https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/framework/data/adon...
- plusplusungood 2y ago
  LINQ is not the same as LINQ-to-SQL. The former is a language feature, the latter a library (one of many) that uses that feature.
  - yarg 2y ago
    Did you reply to the wrong person? Because I'm not the guy that didn't know that.
- LeonB 2y ago
  Yeh. Linq to sql was a much more lightweight extension than EF, and was killed due to internal warring at MS. Database people were investing a lot of time and energy on doing things “properly” with EF, and this scrappy little useful tool, linq to sql, was seen as a competitor.
  - yarg 2y ago
    I quite liked it in the 5 minutes it existed - it was just really easy to use.

cyberax 2y ago

"Short-lived"? LINQ is very much alive in the C# ecosystem. And FROM-first syntax absolutely makes more sense, regardless of autocomplete. You should put the "what I need to select" after the "what I'm selecting from", in general.

yarg 2y ago
LINQ yes, but they killed off the component not long after introducing it.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- BartjeD 2y ago
  Linq to sql still lives
- jiggawatts 2y ago
  It was replaced by Entity Framework.

neonsunset 2y ago

There is https://github.com/linq2db/linq2db https://github.com/linq2db/linq2db which is LINQ to SQL reincarnated. Of course there's EF Core too.

WorldMaker 2y ago
And NHibernate.Linq and Dapper.Extensions.Linq… Most ORMs in the ecosystem have at least one Linq support library, even if just a third-party extension. Also, there are fun things that support Linq syntax for non-ORM uses, too, such as System.Reactive.Linq and LanguageExt: https://github.com/louthy/language-ext/wiki/How-to-deal-with-side-effects#catch https://github.com/louthy/language-ext/wiki/How-to-deal-with...