Michael Schlenker wrote: > Patrick schrieb: >> I am a beginner to intermediate Python Programmer. I can use SQLite with >> it just fine but it is my understanding that relational database and >> object oriented programming our not the perfect marriage. > > Otherwise it does not really matter. Your right that there is a mismatch > between the set oriented operations of relational databases and the more > item oriented OO world, thats why there are all those ORMs like SQLalchemy, > Storm etc. which bridge the gap.
Generally speaking there is no impedance mismatch between relational databases and the OO world. Both natively provide relation and tuple data types and relational operators, and sets and arrays etc, and booleans, numbers, text and binary strings etc. Both natively support the creation of arbitrarily complex user-defined data types and operators. Both natively support automatic persistence of any of the above, and atomicity, and transactions. Both support definition and enforcement of arbitrary type, state, and transition constraints, and triggers. Both support multiple views of the same data, sometimes updateable. Both support invoking the compiler at runtime. Both support type graphs and polymorphism, substitutability, inheritence. How they differ are in relatively minor ways, such as in OO you have the concept of a value that is a pointer to a memory address or implementation detail, while in a relational database you don't and there is a clear distinction between a value and a variable, and those are referred to symbolically. The reason that ORMs exist is to either compensate for relatively minor differences, or to provide a wider variety of APIs for a database than the database is providing itself, or compensate in the application-space for a database implementation that lacks some of the relational database features. -- Darren Duncan _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
