Welcome to Software Development on Codidact!
Will you help us build our independent community of developers helping developers? We're small and trying to grow. We welcome questions about all aspects of software development, from design to code to QA and more. Got questions? Got answers? Got code you'd like someone to review? Please join us.
Post History
Generally speaking, switching data access technologies to avoid a naming conflict seems overkill. Doing that will increase the set of technologies contributors must be familiar with, and impede cod...
Answer
#1: Initial revision
by
meriton
·
2021-06-26T16:04:54Z (over 3 years ago)
Generally speaking, switching data access technologies to avoid a naming conflict seems overkill. Doing that will increase the set of technologies contributors must be familiar with, and impede code reuse. So, how to solve the similar names part? I'd probably choose names that are obviously different, for instance by requiring a big eye catchy prefix like `ArchivedOrder`. Using a prefix ensures that code completion will only suggest archive tables if a programmer explicitly types "Archive", and thus makes it very hard to accidentally refer to the wrong table. Other, entity framework specific, solutions may exist, but alas I am not familiar enough with EF to advise you on their applicability.