ORMs du jour?
paulm at paulm.com
Mon Oct 21 17:54:07 BST 2013
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 12:19 AM, Peter Corlett <abuse at cabal.org.uk> wrote:
> Much of the blog post can be basically summed up by "the languages I use are too verbose, error-prone and inflexible that an ORM does not win me anything". Which is something I quite agree with.
In case anyone was considering actually reading it, this is a pretty
inaccurate summary IMO. There's a small section on verbosity but
considering Active Record is referenced it's by far not the most
pressing concern the author covers by a long way.
It's a long article and does capture pretty thoroughly the impedance
mismatches and gotchas with trying to bridge OO/RDBMS. One of the best
I've read. Even if you're fully committed to ORMs, and there are many,
many great reasons and fully justifiable scenarios to go with one in
our current environment (prevalence of built-from-scratch, lightweight
webapps), knowing the potential pitfalls down the road is important.
More information about the london.pm