http://ayende.comAyende @ RahienCopyright (C) Ayende Rahien 2004 - 2021 (c) 202660@Grava I agree in using framework, of course, but you can wire an app by wiring frameworksI mean, NH - NInject - Caliburn ( an example ) this is the framework of your app that can change for others app. This leave space for innovating per step, ie change the or/m use another GUI framework and so on. Anyway I don't think there is any framework injecting passion in people who don't like to code :) http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment14http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment14Mon, 05 Mar 2012 09:48:19 GMT@Felice try to work with young guys who start to work and after a couple of weeks they start to state something like "In the future I don't want to write code" (just to let you understand the passion) ... well with a FW you can AT LEAST try to let them use something different from stored procedure to get a list of customers :)http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment13http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment13Sat, 03 Mar 2012 21:40:02 GMT@Felice - In my opinion you shouldn't. Some people find ORMs complicated and think they need a framework to abstract it away and make it simpler. But it doesn't really achieve that.http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment12http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment12Fri, 02 Mar 2012 10:35:06 GMTSimple question: why should I need a framework to "insulate" NH or any other OR/M I like? Do I really need a framework for the application infrastructure?http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment11http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment11Fri, 02 Mar 2012 09:16:39 GMTI like the Sharp Architecture project. I am following it from the begining and it is great tool for avoiding plumbing code. However, after SharpArch Lite project release I made a review of the original SharpArch framework code base and I was really stunned about the amount of addons and stuff in the orig. framework. So I see Lite as really neccessary. You can start with Lite and pick stuff from orig Sharp Arch in per case basis. http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment10http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment10Thu, 01 Mar 2012 16:04:22 GMTAlso, I'd take a simple sql query for that type of read operation any day of the week.http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment9http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment9Thu, 01 Mar 2012 16:01:35 GMT@Pete: agreed, I'd choose Django for a lot of what I do at work if I had a choice, but given that we're (mostly) a .NET team, that's not for me to decide. I'd say S#arp Lite keeps out of they way more than most .NET frameworks I've seen.http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment8http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment8Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:54:20 GMT@Per There is nothing wrong with the design itself, its just that you have so much infratructure/vestige/plumbing before getting to the original business problem you set out to solve in the first place. For the context of "smaller" projects, you are going to be better off with rails, django or towerjs.http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment7http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment7Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:49:13 GMTSorry, I meant to address @Wesley and @Bob :)http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment6http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment6Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:36:19 GMTI've used S#arp Lite for some smaller projects, and liked it. Much of it seems to follow the principles Ayende writes about in this blog, so I wouldn't be too surprised if he likes it. @Dmitry and @Roland: S#arp Lite isn't built on top of S#arp Architecture, it's a new framework where they threw out all the things that they considered bloat.http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment5http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment5Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:35:16 GMTCompared to all the other code reviews from ayende i read, this one is fundamentally different as it has nothing to criticise yet. Let's see how it goeshttp://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment4http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment4Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:26:26 GMTThere is absolutely nothing in the query method that cannot be done without the framework.http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment3http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment3Thu, 01 Mar 2012 15:14:54 GMT@Wesley True. The amount of time the .NET community spends on building frameworks on top of other frameworks is freaking ridiculous.http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment2http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment2Thu, 01 Mar 2012 14:58:37 GMTGreat, now we are gonna build frameworks on frameworks on frameworks. Next thing is a S#arp Super lite framework? Why make things more "complex" or depending. Most of the time the plain old MVC3 is better to maintain and/or understand.http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment1http://ayende.com/153441/taking-a-look-at-s-arp-lite-part-i#comment1Thu, 01 Mar 2012 10:29:23 GMT