Entity Framework Petition

re: Entity Framework Petition

Marco Rentier — Mon, 24 Aug 2009 01:11:12 GMT

Used Entity Framework for a large project. Not due to Microsoft marketing. Due to challenges we had in our development and the potential of EF to solve those. And EF was very succesful. Sure, you have to be careful how to write your queries because you can get into performance issues. Sure, the version 1.0 bugs and limitations are a headache. Sure, batch processing with it gets horribly slow when you don't watch it (it wasn't intended for that, but using a different model in batch processes than the rest of the application was also unwanted). But the advantages are so wonderful. We have been able to extend and refactor like crazy without breaking 100's of SP's. The compiler helps you out with typing issues. We have been able to write a lot more functionality in less time and force the programmers to use a better architecture. On top of that, we have been able to extend the Entity Framework with some wonderful functionality like rule validation, audit trails and business objects. And all of this was relatively easy. Entity Framework and the general direction of Oslo have my vote of confidence. It's more than time to move this style of programming to the mainstream.

Links for March 19, 2009

Sportflier — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 01:57:57 GMT

Links for March 19, 2009

re: Entity Framework Petition

Darren — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 18:05:59 GMT

I can't see myself using the EF. I've recently been evaluating various OR mappers, I think I have tried a dozen or so in the last couple months. I have to say so far I have found the EF to have the most difficult learning curve of them all.

I'm sure the EF won't fail given the marketing might of Microsoft. I'm guessing if it was just another OSS project it would quietly wither away unnoticed.

re: Entity Framework Petition

Wierded out — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 15:44:19 GMT

You're all freaks. Seriously... we're not discussing world war 3, its just some computer opinion BS!

re: Entity Framework Petition

Evan — Mon, 14 Jul 2008 15:47:00 GMT

"Sorry, that you dislike the word failure. I used that word to summarize the attitude you state here. If that isn’t failure, how do you define failure in our industry?"

Failure is a very harsh label. Writing a web app in IL or assembler might be extremely costly and very delayed (among other things), but is it a failure if the website actually works afterwards (and meets the business need)? (Yes, I'm using an extreme example to illustrate a perspective.)

Failure and success are not dichotomies. Discussing the fit of a solution on a continuum (gradient) rather than simple black and white allows for greater room of comparison.

From this perspective, EF isn't a "failure". It just falls further to the left of the gradient than many of us would have liked to see (for the reasons you listed in your post and others).

re: Entity Framework Petition

Kathleen — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:14:57 GMT

No, I do not have a book on EF. Sorry.

re: Entity Framework Petition

Justice~! — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 02:12:44 GMT

*Do* you have a book forthcoming on EF? Just a question.

Elegant Code » The Entity Framework Team are Real Professionals

Elegant Code » The Entity Framework Team are Real Professionals — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 19:53:33 GMT

Pingback from Elegant Code » The Entity Framework Team are Real Professionals

re: Entity Framework Petition

Kathleen — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 23:20:40 GMT

Scott,

That’s me. I quit learning years ago. I just sit by the side of the pool sipping martinis. Snorkeling in the morning and partying into the night… oh, wait, I woke up. That’s not quite the story of my life.

The disconnect here is the implication – the rather insulting and annoying one – that because I am not involved in the same techniques and coming to the same conclusions as you that I am not in pursuit of mastery and sharpening my life through practice (beyond and including what I do at a keyboard). There is a great deal that I cannot presently grasp – for many reasons. I’m a traveler just like you. Practice takes many forms.

Interesting that you would bring up kaizen. See, I fail to see the point of wasting effort telling people how correct I am (I am not because correctness is mercurial and illusionary) and I get into something like this because voices can improve the process – not because shouting my current transitory view of correctness has value (my correctness is not relevant to the process).

What is the core of kaizen? Reducing waste. Thus my involvement in this conversation about the petition. The current basis of the conversation, including the petition is wasteful.

Superiority is wrong and a waste of time. The greatest anti-pattern is believing you have the answer. I believe you know this.

Kathleen

re: Entity Framework Petition

Scott Bellware — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 21:27:49 GMT

> I distrust with the concept that anyone who

> hasn't experienced something just can't get it.

> It's been used by religion and used to silence

> critics in an array of human endeavor.

Pursuit of mastery requires learning through experience. There are things that are far too subtle to see without sharpening our perception through practice.

I've got no problem with you being sensitive to this claim, but it's a common observation of people pursuing kaizen.

Any claim can be used inappropriately, and can be used to silence the masses.

I wouldn't think of silencing you. I'm asking you to put your money where your mouth is and go the rest of the way in the learning, which first begins with an understanding that continuous improvement is a pursuit of knowledge we don't presently have and that is too fine for us to presently grasp.

You're never too young to stop learning.

re: Entity Framework Petition

Kathleen — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 18:22:07 GMT

Scott,

Thanks for the comments.

>> Entity Framework causes waste, lost productivity, and lower business performance because of the interplay of all of its short comings together. <<

Sorry, that you dislike the word failure. I used that word to summarize the attitude you state here. If that isn’t failure, how do you define failure in our industry?

I'm a bit at a loss to respond to the implication that you've been more open to learning new things than I or a number of other people have. That I and others have explored different directions is true. Obviously we have chosen the directions with the most tangible benefit to us. That is what is interesting.

I distrust with the concept that anyone who hasn't experienced something just can't get it. It's been used by religion and used to silence critics in an array of human endeavor. Distrust does not mean you are not correct.

Perhaps we will have a chance to work together sometime, as I find it interesting to push boundaries in new directions – that’s what I’m in this ball game for. Right now, the code gen (C#/VB neutral templates), metadata (decades long application life spans), write once run on any technology user interfaces, workflow ballets, embedded localization, managing programmer overload and other research directions just seem more interesting.

I think the rest of what I would like to say in response to this would work better as a new blog post. Feel free to continue the conversation.

re: Entity Framework Petition

Scott Bellware — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:25:19 GMT

You're right that EF 1.0 isn't a failure because of any of those individual bullet points taken in isolation. And it's arguable as to whether v1 is a failure or not. I wouldn't personally choose to use the word "failure" here, so I'm going to move away from it.

Entity Framework causes waste, lost productivity, and lower business performance because of the interplay of all of its short comings together.

If we focus on issues merely in isolation, we're indulging local optima focus which doesn't bring us to a meaningful understanding of the impact of the issues on team, projects, and businesses.

While I respect that you've been at this software thing for 20 years as I have, I also recognize that I've been open to learning things like TDD and entity-oriented architecture and design at more than a cursory level and that we have different perspectives because of a gulf of experience in the issues that are pertinent to the authors and signatories of the EF letter.

I welcome the opportunity to work with you on an project to transfer real contextual knowledge and understanding about these issues that we have talked about in the past that I have observed aren't understood but through tangible, extended experience.