Comments on: Persistence Ignorance http://www.jeffperrin.com/index.php/2007/03/14/persistence-ignorance/ Just another WordPress weblog Sat, 17 May 2008 09:48:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.3 by: Mats Helander http://www.jeffperrin.com/index.php/2007/03/14/persistence-ignorance/#comment-5447 Fri, 16 Mar 2007 10:25:52 +0000 http://www.jeffperrin.com/index.php/2007/03/14/persistence-ignorance/#comment-5447 Specifying your mapping meta data with attributes can be kind of convenient, but one good thing with using xml is that it is easier to use a specialized tool for creating and maintaining it, which won't have to try to mess about with your code files, adding attributes to them. NPersist also supports both attributes and xml nowadays, since the best way is obviously to have the option to decide for yourself which you prefer, but I have to agree with Simon that it probably won't take long until code files have more attributes than code in them, so in my opinion the xml files are still the better way to go. /Mats Specifying your mapping meta data with attributes can be kind of convenient, but one good thing with using xml is that it is easier to use a specialized tool for creating and maintaining it, which won’t have to try to mess about with your code files, adding attributes to them.

NPersist also supports both attributes and xml nowadays, since the best way is obviously to have the option to decide for yourself which you prefer, but I have to agree with Simon that it probably won’t take long until code files have more attributes than code in them, so in my opinion the xml files are still the better way to go.

/Mats

]]> by: Simon http://www.jeffperrin.com/index.php/2007/03/14/persistence-ignorance/#comment-5443 Thu, 15 Mar 2007 14:50:28 +0000 http://www.jeffperrin.com/index.php/2007/03/14/persistence-ignorance/#comment-5443 It's funny how things go around in circle. I thought one of the main purposes of using XML is to separate configuration out of the source code. Annotation will become source code in a different form. Next thing you know you'll end up with more annotation than the actual code. People will start whining again. It’s funny how things go around in circle. I thought one of the main purposes of using XML is to separate configuration out of the source code. Annotation will become source code in a different form. Next thing you know you’ll end up with more annotation than the actual code. People will start whining again.

]]> by: Jeff Perrin http://www.jeffperrin.com/index.php/2007/03/14/persistence-ignorance/#comment-5442 Thu, 15 Mar 2007 13:05:58 +0000 http://www.jeffperrin.com/index.php/2007/03/14/persistence-ignorance/#comment-5442 Really? That's not so good. Really? That’s not so good.

]]> by: Ayende Rahien http://www.jeffperrin.com/index.php/2007/03/14/persistence-ignorance/#comment-5440 Thu, 15 Mar 2007 06:48:29 +0000 http://www.jeffperrin.com/index.php/2007/03/14/persistence-ignorance/#comment-5440 It is certainly a LOT easier to have it done via attributes, but it is essential that it won't be done _just_ with attributes. The Microsoft approach a the moment seems to require BOTH attributes and multiply XML files. It is certainly a LOT easier to have it done via attributes, but it is essential that it won’t be done _just_ with attributes.
The Microsoft approach a the moment seems to require BOTH attributes and multiply XML files.

]]>