4 ms·
> At this point I'm convinced only MS know how to write LINQ providers that won't fall over the moment you try to do something useful with them. I would argue
by zapov 12y ago
> At this point I'm convinced only MS know how to write LINQ providers that won't fall over the moment you try to do something useful with them.
I would argue Revenj + Postgres provide much better developer experience. But as you said, it's not written by Microsoft so that attitude doesn't help it out.
I'm 100% sure Microsoft can't write LINQ provider which actually understands Postgres and can use it to the fullest (as Revenj can).
- dodyg 12y agoThe problem with Revenj is that it seems to tied to dsl-platform, which looks like an online service. People would rather to have their compiler tools with them. You don't want your code investments to go 'poof' should the online service fails.
- zapov 12y agoWhile that's a fair criticism (to have compiler offline), dsl-platform can be licensed for an offline use. It's not like Revenj needs dsl-platform, but rather that dsl-platform integrates into Revenj. So to make it blunt, would you try/use Revenj if it had part of dsl-platform compilers available for offline use?
- dodyg 12y agoIt's a surprise to me that RevenJ can be used without dsl-platform because the readme makes it look like it is dependent on dsl-platform. Yes, i would try dsl-platform if it's available offline. Online compilers are pretty much deal breakers for me.