I have to second this; I have long disagreed with the implication, in the documentation, that the SQLTransformer should be deprecated because of ESQL.The ESQL generator AFAIK supports everything one could need to do via the SQLTransformer and there does not seem to be a reason to continue to support both technologies.How can that be true? The transformation point in the pipeline is very different than a generator. For example, I can order transformations such that the SQL transformer comes between other transforms but you couldn't do that with a generator.Per
It gives new users the sense that the Generation stage is the only place to perform "heavy-duty" operations like data access. I think this discourages creative thinking in using the Transformation stage to solve problems. Just because M-V (of MVC fame) maps nicely to G-T, doesn't mean that it should in every case, or that this is necessarily preferable. A well-crafted Transformer can provide extremely effective code reuse.
ESQL is certainly more developed, but it is not a replacement. Where in SQLTransformer do you suspect code rot? Have people been experiencing problems with it?
--Greg Weinger
