Re: Microsoft's bridge between OO and relational
Date: 5 Jun 2006 08:13:12 -0700
> JXStern wrote:
> > What do y'all think of this stuff?
> > J.
> > http://www.ftponline.com/vsm/2006_04/magazine/features/rjennings/
> > Test Drive VB9 and DLinq
> > The January 2006 Language Integrated Query (LINQ) preview for the next
> > ("Orcas") version of Visual Basic enables automating SQL Server
> > object-relational mapping for DLinq and enhances XLinq syntax for
> > literal XML and late binding.
> > Roger Jennings
> > March 27, 2006
> > Technology Toolbox: VB.NET, SQL Server 2005, XML, Visual Studio 2005,
> > or Visual Basic or Visual Web Developer Express editions, Visual Basic
> > 9.0 LINQ Technology Preview (January 2006), SQL Server 2005 Express
> > Edition or higher, Northwind sample database
> > The forthcoming Visual Studio "Orcas" release promises major upgrades
> > to data-management programming with Visual Basic 9.0 and C# 3.0.
> > Language Integrated Query (LINQ) and its data (DLinq) and XML (XLinq)
> > libraries transform relational data and XML documents into
> > first-class, interoperable CLR objects
> > ...
> Fascinating, but ultimately not compelling. They get all the right
> functionality, but they don't manage the complexity at all.
> It's not elegant; it's backwards-compatible. Still, one of the
> few real attempts to do something ambitious. A noble failure.
> It is worth reading some of the papers that started out their
> whole effort.
Erik Meijer and some of the others working on this are decent researchers, with pretty solid pedigrees. They seem to be adding some useful type inferencing to Visual Basic, but I agree with Marshall: fascinating but not compelling. They omit constraints completely, for one.
If Java and other alternatives weren't so completely stagnant and rotting in the clutches of their masters, this wouldn't look so good. I think I'm impressed mainly because it's a stark contrast to the last decade of Microsoft "innovation." But given the researchers they've bought over the last few years, we should expect much better.