4) Never Ever make statements of extremes. Never. Ever.

I'm sorry, most of what this guy is saying is crap.

1. learn about single responsibility
2. GridViews are fine for many applications
3. ObjectDataSource can be used effectively, but you should know when not to use it.
4. Everything this guy says about store procedures is pure and utter crap. I don't think he has even tried doing a performance comparison, and doesn't mention parameterizing ad-hoc queries. That is misleading as all get out.
5. You shouldn't be writing SQL anyway! It is called an ORM. Lookup NHibernate, SubSonic, LLBLGen, LINQ2SQL, and pick the one that works best for you.

OMG! :,(

> 5. You shouldn't be writing SQL anyway! It is called an ORM. Lookup NHibernate, SubSonic, LLBLGen, LINQ2SQL, and pick the one that works best for you.

Am I the only .NET developer in the universe that writes SQL more complicated than trivial CRUD?

@foobar

If your SQL is getting very complicated, it's likely your logic should be moved out of SQL and into your business layer. SQL should be for storing data, not complex business logic.

Of course, I can't give absolute advice without understanding your codebase, but in general, if you're doing crazy complex stuff in SQL, it may be the wrong place for it.

> If your SQL is getting very complicated, it's likely your logic should be moved out of SQL and into your business layer. SQL should be for storing data, not complex business logic.

Sure, I'll just take my tables which have 1,000,000 entries each and do some LINQ on them. I'm sure that'll work out well. I mean, who needs indexes when you've got NHibernate?

I'll say it once, I'll say it again: Relational databases were created by computer scientists. ORMs were originally created by Java developers.

@foobar > I'm sure that'll work out well. I mean, who needs indexes when you've got NHibernate?
No, that is being stupid. There is nothing about ORM that trumps Relational theory. Actually, I think you are talking out of your ass because I doubt you've ever used an ORM. They still create SQL, but in a more programmer friendly way. The reality is that you can write really bad queries in either one -- a good ORM will just help you from creating super bad queries.

And you can take your 1,000,000 entry tables. If your database fits on a laptop hard drive it just isn't that big of a deal to me.

>Relational databases were created by computer scientists. ORMs were originally created by Java developers.
ORMs predate Java, go back to SmallTalk. And if you are thinking those guys are Computer Scientist you are out of your freaking mind.

Here is a different one for you: SQL is the Assembly of programming languages. I've said that one before too.

its amazing how little it takes for some people to consider themselves as professionals :)