This thread looks to be a little on the old side and therefore may no longer be relevant. Please see if there is a newer thread on the subject and ensure you're using the most recent build of any software if your question regards a particular product.
This thread has been locked and is no longer accepting new posts, if you have a question regarding this topic please email us at support@mindscape.co.nz
|
I'm currently evaluating Lightspeed to see if we can use it for upcoming projects. Where can i find a list which contains all the features in version 3.0 ? Kind regards, |
|
|
|
|
Hi there,
The reason i'm asking this is because my company is looking for an ORM tool, which we will be using in our new projects the next couple of years.
Maybe someone could tell me if Lightspeed is the right ORM for us?
Any feedback would be very appriciated and please correct me if i'm wrong.
The requirements are:
- Sqlserver 2008 datatypes support (FileStream, etc)
- Full dynamic data support
- I see that lightspeed has it's own validation attributes. We would also like to use System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations attributes.(I think this is required for dynamic data and asp.net MVC validation, or is this not necceary?)
- Easy to perform unit-testing without hitting the DB. I've noticed that the LS busines object inherit from a baseclass. I don't have any experience with unit-testing/mocking yet, but i was under the impression that made it difficult to mock the business objects.
Kind regards,
Erik
|
|
|
|
|
Whoops, something went wrong there (i was using Google Chrome). But this is my post with formatting: Hi there, The reason i'm asking this is because my company is looking for an ORM tool, which we will be using in our new projects the next couple of years. Maybe someone could tell me if Lightspeed is the right ORM for us? The requirements are: - Sqlserver 2008 datatypes support (FileStream, etc) - Full dynamic data support - I see that lightspeed has it's own validation attributes. We would also like to use System.ComponentModel.DataAnnotations attributes.(I think this is required for dynamic data and asp.net MVC validation, or is this not necceary?) - Easy to perform unit-testing without hitting the DB. I've noticed that the LS busines object inherit from a baseclass. I don't have any experience with unit-testing/mocking yet, but i was under the impression that made it difficult to mock the business objects. Kind regards, Erik |
|
|
|
|
Hello Erik, SQL Server 2008 data types support Please see http://www.mindscape.co.nz/blog/index.php/2009/03/15/lightspeed-and-sql-server-2008/ -- and do leave your feedback if there are particular features such as filestreams that you are particularly keen to see! Full dynamic data support We have ASP.NET dynamic data support in 2.2. We don't currently have specific plans to extend this in 3.0, but if there are things that you need which are missing then please let us know and we'll have a look at implementing them. (And where possible we'll do so on the 2.2 branch so you don't have to wait for 3.0.) DataAnnotations validation support Dynamic data does respect LightSpeed validations, though it is probably not as thoroughly integrated as DataAnnotations. You should be able to apply DataAnnotations to LightSpeed entities in addition to or in place of LightSpeed validations, though in this case it will be up to your app or framework to invoke the validation. Regarding ASP.NET MVC validation and binding, see Jeremy's posts about this on http://www.mindscape.co.nz/staff/jeremy/ -- specifically http://www.mindscape.co.nz/staff/jeremy/index.php/2009/03/aspnet-mvc-part4/ but the whole "MVC and LightSpeed" series is worth a read if you want to get a picture of how LightSpeed can be fitted into MVC. We've had quite a bit of experience using LightSpeed with MVC so we'd be very happy to advise or assist. Again, by the way, all this works with 2.2. Unit testing without hitting the database We have started work on testability improvements and expect to deliver these in 3.0, but we are not yet sure of the exact scope of what we'll ship. We'll be saying more about this on the blog as it firms up. Note that you can already unit-test non-persistence-related aspects of entity classes -- you can new up an entity without needing to have a database present so you can still test domain methods -- the database is only required if you need to test behaviour across a load or save point. But yeah, we're still keen to improve this situation. Hope this clarifies things -- please let us know if you have any more questions or feedback, or if you want to expand on any of the specific issues or responses above! |
|
|
|
