Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 19th Nov 2007 21:16 UTC, submitted by Wyatt Lyon Preul
.NET (dotGNU too) Scott Guthrie has announced that Visual Studio 2008 and .NET 3.5 are now available for download and provides a tour of some of the new features. "Visual Studio 2008 and .NET 3.5 contain a ton of new functionality and improvements. Below are links to blog posts I've done myself as well as links to videos you can watch to learn more about it."
Thread beginning with comment 285576
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[4]: Ruby on Rails
by duckie on Tue 20th Nov 2007 19:54 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Ruby on Rails"
Member since:

LINQ info:

"It extends C# and Visual Basic with native language syntax for queries and provides class libraries to take advantage of these capabilities"

Microsoft already created the providers "LINQ to SQL", "LINQ to XML" + more.

You can create any provider you want, see an example here "A LINQ provider for RDF files".

LINQ != activerecord.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[5]: Ruby on Rails
by MollyC on Wed 21st Nov 2007 01:09 in reply to "RE[4]: Ruby on Rails"
MollyC Member since:


And besides "LING to SQL" and "LINQ to XML", Microsoft has also created LINQ to Objects, which gives LINQ the ability to query any collection or object that implements IEnumerable. And there are already third party LINQ providers specializing in querying particular data (web queries, RSS feeds, etc).

And of course, there's PLINQ (Parallel LINQ) that automatically runs queries on multiple cores/cpus.

LINQ rocks. ;)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[6]: Ruby on Rails
by StaubSaugerNZ on Wed 21st Nov 2007 18:58 in reply to "RE[5]: Ruby on Rails"
StaubSaugerNZ Member since:

May I ask the question as to whether LINQ has a syntax that is the same across all database back-ends or is it specific to the database in question? If it is specific to a particular database then that sux from a migration point of view (which happens in the real world). I've just completed a government Postgresql to Oracle project and the database specific SQL in JDBC sux. They should have used Hibernate which has the same syntax no matter what the target is.

Reply Parent Score: 1