Tuesday, September 12, 2006
« Answers to some CSLA .NET questions | Main | Twin Cities Code Camp »
CSLA .NET 2.1 BETA available for download

I just updated the download page (www.lhotka.net/cslanet/download.aspx) to make the BETA version of CSLA .NET 2.1 available.

Make sure you read the Change Log document before going too far. I've tried to list all breaking changes as a summary at the top, with my estimate on the likely impact of each one. You can find more details further into the document.

There will be no more functional changes to 2.1, so this download is complete. There obviously could be bugs, but enough people have been helping me find issues with the last couple pre-releases that I think it is pretty stable at this point.

Barring anyone finding a major issue, I am still planning to release 2.1 by the end of September, so if you have any near-term plans to use 2.1 I strongly recommend trying this beta version on a non-production copy of your project over the next 10 days or so. That will allow you to provide me with any bug reports in enough time that I can try and address them.

CSLA .NET
Tuesday, September 12, 2006 8:18:19 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00)  #    Disclaimer  |  Comments [3]  |  Related posts:
Silverlight data portal, async calls and 404 errors
CSLA .NET Master Class in November
Overview of CSLA .NET 3.6 for Windows and Silverlight
CSLA .NET 3.6 for Windows and for Silverlight Beta 1 released
CSLA .NET 3.6 (Silverlight and Windows) pre-release (080919)
CSLA .NET 3.6+ in VB - a community effort?

Wednesday, September 13, 2006 12:59:29 AM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00)
Regarding the latest changes to 2.1 Beta, the use of a 1 for the signifier that criteria should be ignored is not necessarly the clearest thing. You might want to consider using either a class/enum of your own specification that is never used for anything else and thus can be named something clear like CriteriaNotUsed. If aren't comfortable introducing a class just for that, then how about using DBNull.Value and checking if criteria is DBNull? Finally, if you still want to use the constant 1, please consider at least making it a static readonly int.
Marc Brooks
Wednesday, September 13, 2006 5:29:37 AM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00)
Yes, I agree that such a value is not real clear. The use of an explicit parameter would have been better, but would have increased the size of the byte stream on the wire (in the case of a remote data portal). Similarly, the use of a custom type rather than a simple type would also increase the size of the byte stream.

But your suggestion of using an integer constant for readability is a good one. I see no downside there at all. Thanks!
Rockford Lhotka
Wednesday, September 13, 2006 8:38:50 PM (Central Standard Time, UTC-06:00)
I'm starting a new project today and will give it a run. I really like the Validation rules Severity and dependant properties as those were the last two items I made custom extensions to the 1.x framework that kept me from CSLA 2.x. I'll let you know if I spot anything issues. Thanks for the continual improvements.
Jim Wooley
Comments are closed.