<p>I've noticed that there seems to be quite a bit of hostility towards Linq To Entities particularly from the Alt.Net folks.  I understand the resistance to more "drag and drop" programming, but from my understanding, Linq To Entities doesn't require it.  </p>

<p>We're currently using Linq to SQL, and we are using the DBML document to define it (once you get more than a dozen or so tables, the designer is pretty useless.)</p>

<p>So why wouldn't the same approach work for Linq To Entities?</p>

[{'answer_id': 55189, 'author': 'Iain Holder', 'author_id': 1122, 'author_profile': 'https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1122', 'pm_score': 4, 'selected': True, 'text': '<p>I don\'t think it\'s a hate for the <em>idea</em> of it per se.  It\'s just that people don\'t like the <em>implementation</em> of it.</p>\n\n<p><a href="http://efvote.wufoo.com/forms/ado-net-entity-framework-vote-of-no-confidence/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://efvote.wufoo.com/forms/ado-net-entity-framework-vote-of-no-confidence/</a></p>\n'}, {'answer_id': 413046, 'author': 'Community', 'author_id': -1, 'author_profile': 'https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1', 'pm_score': 3, 'selected': False, 'text': '<p>Actually, once you start delving into it, LTE is completely useless for enterprise level frameworks.  The fact that there is very little inheritance support (in LTS as well) makes for a lot of redundant code.  Also, I will be moving back to LTS (Linq to SQL) because it actually allows you to define mappings via Attributes instead of a File.  LTE only works with an external file.</p>\n'}, {'answer_id': 413057, 'author': 'ZombieSheep', 'author_id': 377, 'author_profile': 'https://Stackoverflow.com/users/377', 'pm_score': 1, 'selected': False, 'text': "<p>I am quite sold on the priciples of Linq to Entities, and the Entity Framework in general, but I do have reservations about its current incarnation.  I do freely admit to not having used it in anything more than a self-educational and very small way, though.  The level of flexibility doesn't seem to be there yet but I'm sure it will come.  I was told by one of the MS technology evangelists (great job title) that EF was the MS strategic choice for the future.  Assuming this is the case, I can only see things getting better in this arena.</p>\n"}, {'answer_id': 413079, 'author': 'Quibblesome', 'author_id': 1143, 'author_profile': 'https://Stackoverflow.com/users/1143', 'pm_score': 1, 'selected': False, 'text': '<p>There might also be a bit of "second place" animosity as well. MS are <em>very</em> late to market with L2E, I myself became interested in ORM about three years ago or so and MS was nowhere to be seen at this point.</p>\n\n<p>A lot of us have already spent the time learning another ORM (such as NHibernate) and are used to a certain level and type of functionality being available and I this isn\'t evident in L2E yet. </p>\n\n<p>This "second place" animosity isn\'t old news to be honest I don\'t know why MS don\'t spend more time supporting solutions already in place, we\'ve seen this all before with NAnt -> MSBuild and NUnit -> MsTest, it would save everyone a lot of time and effort if they just accepted one of the better and mature solutions and endeavoured to support that as opposed to brewing their own all the time.</p>\n'}, {'answer_id': 886548, 'author': 'Community', 'author_id': -1, 'author_profile': 'https://Stackoverflow.com/users/-1', 'pm_score': 2, 'selected': False, 'text': "<p>The Linq to Entity hate is much deserved. This product fails any purpose more complex then the lame demos GU uses it for on his blog. EF is far from ready for prime time. Microsoft just can't get data correct in the .BLOAT world they seem to changes data paradigm every time the wind blows. FoxPro has been around for 20 years with the same basic data core. Given SQL Server uses much of VFP data technology perhaps MSFT could learn a bit about manipulating data and data centric languages from something that worked.</p>\n"}, {'answer_id': 5393900, 'author': 'Ralph Shillington', 'author_id': 81514, 'author_profile': 'https://Stackoverflow.com/users/81514', 'pm_score': 0, 'selected': False, 'text': '<p>I would add that LTE implementation of TPT inheritance is nothing short of criminal. See my question <a href="https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4126668/when-quering-over-a-base-type-why-does-the-ef-provider-generate-all-those-union-a">here</a>.</p>\n\n<p>And while I\'m at it, I believe that the many <a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias=aps&amp;field-keywords=entity+framework+in+books&amp;x=0&amp;y=0" rel="nofollow noreferrer">published EF pundits</a> are at least in part complicit.  I have yet to find any published material on EF that cautions against queries of base types.  If I were to try it on the model that I have, SQL Server simply gives up with the exception.</p>\n\n<blockquote>\n  <p>Some part of your SQL statement is\n  nested too deeply. Rewrite the query\n  or break it up into smaller queries.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>I would love to rewrite the query, but LTE as absolved me of that burden.  Thanks (^not)</p>\n'}]
['https://Stackoverflow.com/questions/55179', 'https://Stackoverflow.com', 'https://Stackoverflow.com/users/3268/']