Provider factory for Mobile / Compact Framework
am 24.11.2007 06:56:53 von Larry
Hello,
I am about to write an app for Pocket PC 2003 / Windows CE / Mobile 5 (don't
know which yet) from which I need to query both SQL Server Express 2005 and
SQLCe. I would like to be able to use a provider factory to not have to
duplicate code.
ADO 2.0 has DbProviderFactory, but it is not available in the .NET Compact
framework. I could write my own provider factory "the old way" using
IDbConnection, etc., but I rather not reinvent that wheel.
Can anyone point me to source for a good data access provider factory (C #,
please) that works in .NET Compact framework?
Thanks,
Larry
Re: Provider factory for Mobile / Compact Framework
am 25.11.2007 08:44:39 von nemtsev
Hello Larry,
I'd recommend to look at Mobile Client Software Factory.
Not completely sure that it's exist there, but logically it might be
---
WBR,
Michael Nemtsev [.NET/C# MVP] :: blog: http://spaces.live.com/laflour
"The greatest danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we
miss it, but that it is too low and we reach it" (c) Michelangelo
L> Hello,
L>
L> I am about to write an app for Pocket PC 2003 / Windows CE / Mobile 5
L> (don't know which yet) from which I need to query both SQL Server
L> Express 2005 and SQLCe. I would like to be able to use a provider
L> factory to not have to duplicate code.
L>
L> ADO 2.0 has DbProviderFactory, but it is not available in the .NET
L> Compact framework. I could write my own provider factory "the old
L> way" using IDbConnection, etc., but I rather not reinvent that wheel.
L>
L> Can anyone point me to source for a good data access provider factory
L> (C #, please) that works in .NET Compact framework?
L>
L> Thanks,
L> Larry
Re: Provider factory for Mobile / Compact Framework
am 25.11.2007 18:30:01 von Larry
"Michael Nemtsev [MVP]" wrote in message
news:3d9fba1a1ca3d8c9fdaa5e7f0e33@msnews.microsoft.com...
> Hello Larry,
>
> I'd recommend to look at Mobile Client Software Factory.
> Not completely sure that it's exist there, but logically it might be
>
Thanks for the suggestion - I'll check it out.
Larry