C#

Blumen wrote:

But dispose is a method of base class, so is it okay to remove the virtual keyword?

Blumen wrote:

Does that mean I have to override dispose on my class

Blumen wrote:

and make class sealed

Blumen wrote:

ObjectDatasource control in ADO.NET 2.0. So will this control call my class's Dispose()

public class CustomerDal
{
  public void AddCustomer(...){
     using(SqlConnection connection = new SqlConnection(...))
     using(SqlCommand command = new SqlCommand(connection,...)){
        // your code
     }
  }
}

Pete O'Hanlon wrote:

They give broad brush guidelines that people tend to end up as treating as gospel.

Pete O'Hanlon wrote:

This is the whole problem with FxCop (and utility's like it). They give broad brush guidelines that people tend to end up as treating as gospel.

Pete O'Hanlon wrote:

This suggestion only makes sense if your SqlConnection/SqlCommand objects are member variables.

Pete O'Hanlon wrote:

If they are a local variable then there is no sense in using IDisposable to manage this.

Blumen wrote:

Does that mean I have to override dispose on my class like:

N a v a n e e t h wrote:

Scott dorman has a great article[^] on the subject. It's worth reading.

public sealed class CustomerDal:IDisposable
{
  SqlConnection connection;
  SqlCommand command;
  
  public void Dispose()
  {
     // Free any managed resources in this section 
       if (connection != null)
          connection.Dispose();

       if (command != null)
          command.Dispose();            
  }
    //My Methods go here..  
}

Blumen wrote:

Could anyone point me to a resource where I can find a DAL class which is provider independent, which supports transaction as well in C# 2.0?