SharpLab VS JDBI

Do these all compile to the exact same thing?

https://sharplab.io/#v2:CYLg1APgAgTAjAWAFBQMwAJboMLoN7LpHoCW...

Yes, so you are right.

Recently, while creating some experimental C# source code generators (xafero/csharp-generators), I was just concatenating strings together. Like you do, you know, if things have to go very quickly. If you have a simple use case, use a formatted multi-line string or some template library like scriban. But I searched for a way to generate more and more complicated logic easily - like for example, adding raw SQL handler methods to my pre-generated DBSet-like classes for my ADO.NET experiment. You could now say: Use Roslyn and that's really fine if you look everything up in a website like SharpLab, which shows immediately the syntax tree of our C# code.

One results in MOVSX, the other in MOVZX [1]. The difference thus is sign/zero extension when moving to the larger register. However, they seem to perform pretty much identical if I'm reading Agner Fog's instruction tables correctly.

[1] https://sharplab.io/#v2:C4LghgzgtgPgAgJgIwFgBQcDMACR2DC2A3ut...

If you don't have an IDE, you can use SharpLab.io or dotnet fiddle

The closest online tool I can think of would be SharpLab, but you can only choose between Roslyn's git branches instead of C# versions.

Your code is destructuring two properties and discarding one of them. It doesn't work with a single property: https://sharplab.io/#v2:C4LgTgrgdgNAJiA1AHwAICYAMBYAUBgRj2Nw...

I think that records don't generate a deconstruct method when they only have one property, but even if you manually define one you'll get an error on `var (varName) = ...`

- LinqPad is great and I love, but, IMO, it is not the best tool to start with. It does not provide intellisense or debugger in the free version. Assuming you do not want to pay for this licence just to play a little with the language, I'd suggest https://sharplab.io/. It is not as powerfull as LinqPad, but at least it gives you suggestions.

While this may work for greenfield applications, I don't see this working well for preexisting schemas. From their getting started page: "Database fields are automatically created for any abstract getter methods", which definitely scares me away since they seem to be relying on automatic field type conversions.

I prefer to manage my schemas when I can and do type and DAO conversions via mapper classes in the very simple and elegant JDBI framework where you write SQL annotations above your DAO methods https://jdbi.org/#_declarative_api

JDBI does wonders for wonky old schemas you've inherited, since joins etc work out of the box (just throw them in your annotations!) The annotations can also link to .SQL files for the big hairy queries.

All these "do magic" frameworks (hibernate being one of the first) work in the simple cases but then fall apart whenever you need to do anything complex/not-prescribed. I end up having to dig into the internals of the framework to see what's going wrong which negates their whole value add.

> I've been doing ORM on Java since Hibernate was new, and it has always sucked.

Have you ever looked at something like myBatis? In particular, the XML mappers: https://mybatis.org/mybatis-3/dynamic-sql.html

Looking back, I actually quite liked it - you had conditionals and ability to build queries dynamically (including snippets, doing loops etc.), while still writing mostly SQL with a bit of XML DSL around it, which didn't suck as much as one might imagine. The only problem was that there was still writing some boilerplate, which I wasn't the biggest fan of.

Hibernate always felt like walking across a bridge that might collapse at any moment (one eager fetch away from killing the performance, or having some obscure issue related to the entity mappings), however I liked tooling that let you point towards your database and get a local set of entities mapped automatically, even though codegen also used to have some issues occasionally (e.g. date types).

That said, there's also projects like jOOQ which had a more code centric approach, although I recall it being slightly awkward to use in practice: https://www.jooq.org/ (and the autocomplete killed the performance in some IDEs because of all the possible method signatures)

More recently, when working on a Java project, I opted for JDBI3, which felt reasonably close to what you're describing, at the expense of not being able to build dynamic queries as easily, as it was with myBatis: https://jdbi.org/

That said, with the multi-line string support we have in Java now, it was rather pleasant regardless: https://blog.kronis.dev/tutorials/2-4-pidgeot-a-system-for-m...

I don't think there's a silver bullet out there, everything from lightweight ORMs, to heavy ORMs like Hibernate, or even writing pure SQL has drawbacks. You just have to make the tradeoffs that will see you being successful in your particular project.

I found JDBi[1] to be a really nice balance between ORM and raw SQL. It gives me the flexibility I need but takes care of a lot of the boilerplate. It's almost like a third category.

1. http://jdbi.org

You could use something like jdbi or mybatis. It's not as ugly as raw jdbc and easier to use without all of the gunk from an ORM like hibernate.

We use JDBI. Very simple and lightweight. It uses an object mapper not a full fledged ORM.

Alternatively there are... hybrid solutions like Kotlin's https://github.com/JetBrains/Exposed or https://jdbi.org/ that don't quite... do all the heavy lifting for querying but allow you to sorta stitch queries together manually.

As seems that Micronaut does not include anything similar by default, we use JDBI and that SQL to retrieve one random greeting from the greetings table.

Ah! E sobre o que eu usei no backend, alem de postgres e fly.io, o backend eh eh Java, usando um framework chamado quarkus e jdbi pra fazer a interface com o banco.

More personally, I'm not much an ORM guy. I've just never found that the benefits outweigh the costs, but that's just my opinion. That said, I don't use JDBC directly in my own projects anymore, strongly preferring to use JDBI instead. I find that it walks the line between "make using the database easier" and "get between you and the database" beautifully. But there's not a darn thing wrong with using JDBC directly.