Pull request for changes to Massive.cs only #149

Closed
wants to merge 5 commits into
from

2 participants

@CreepyGnome

Massive
-Fixed two missing null reference checks
-Removed virtual from TableName and PrimaryKeyField properties
-Added ExecuteWithReturn that can support procs and namedArgs
-Added additional CreateCommand method to support ExecuteWithReturn
-Modify some usage to be more readable without any loss to number of lines
-Modified some usage to use Linq 
-Minor cleanup and attempting to sync with primary coding standards already existing in the file.

Massive.Sqlite

  • Provided connection string name if not a valid name will assume it is an actual connection string.
  • Fixed getting factory actually tries to use connection string provider first before using default.
CreepyGnome added some commits Aug 1, 2012
@CreepyGnome CreepyGnome Update Massive.cs
Minor cleanup
Removed virtual from TableName and PrimaryKeyField properties
Modify some usage to be more readable without any loss to number of lines
Modified some usage to use Linq 
Sync'd with primary existing coding standards in the file.
Reduced total lines by 77
20b3408
@CreepyGnome CreepyGnome Update Massive.cs
Fixed missing curly brace bug I introduced, added one line :(
cb4d7da
@CreepyGnome CreepyGnome Update Massive.cs
Provided connection string name if not a valid name will assume it is an actual connection string.
cleaned up getting factory
2ef40c3
@CreepyGnome CreepyGnome Update Massive.Sqlite.cs
Provided connection string name if not a valid name will assume it is an actual connection string.
Fixed getting factory actually tries to use connection string provider first before using default.
25b8249
@CreepyGnome CreepyGnome Update Massive.cs
Added ExecuteWithReturn that can support procs and namedArgs
Added additional CreateCommand method to support ExecuteWithReturn
1e265d6
@robconery
Collaborator

I'm not sure what I'm looking at here. It looks like you've added braces, some code where code isn't needed, and a new method call that handles sprocs that have a RETURN statement. If you don't mind - can you separate these please? New functionality is interesting, but generally I like to include things that are needed into the core. Sprocs, with a RETURN, aren't something (in my mind) that are needed by everyone that uses Massive.

In terms of "code cleanup" - I kind of liked it just the way it was.

@CreepyGnome
@robconery
Collaborator

Unfortunately each changeset is included if I merge it :). I do appreciate the help, but there are some things I don't want in the core. The simplest way to do this is submit a separate pull request perhaps on a branch.

@robconery robconery closed this Sep 13, 2012
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment