Linq with simple class not Linq to SQL
Posted on 2013-06-21
Will I loose much if I can not use Linq to SQL, but only a simple class of the Table fields with simple get/sets?...
Reason I am asking is I am trying to do a project for VS 2012 Store App, and it seems it will only use SQLite for a DB rather then CompactSQL or others.. The app store also has added other conditions of needing to be async..
So I only have found one tutorial of using SQLite in a Windows store app with the async, and that uses Linq.. Since I haven't used Linq thought I would learn that, and my course is pushing me to the Linq to SQL.. All other examples for SQLite are for VS2010 or a lower version and could care less about the async requirement. Some of these seem more t-SQl like and I would feel more comfortable using, but if it doesn't use async I can't use.
But as the Video on implementing SQLite does not use Linq to SQL, and since it is not a MS product SQLite is not a choice in VS for either DatabaseExplorer or Linq to SQL.. Other searches says theres a way to get it, but installs of SQLite from these methods do not supply the additional supported features as claimed..
So I have a Video on SQLite in VS using very simple add/upd/delete/select statement examples for Linq with simple class gets/sets for table fields, and I am learning more complex Linq that uses Linq to SQL... I fear there may be a disconnect and what I am learning I will not be able to use, when simple and complex collide..
Should I worry, or not??