On Sun, Jul 18, 2010 at 2:30 PM, Leandro Hermida <[email protected] > wrote:
> >>> Hi, very sorry... I was speaking more in general about writing an > OO-centric ORM and that it is difficult topic but that there are very well > established open-source solutions like Hibernate and others in the space > that one could draw inspiration or ideas from to build a Perl > Moose/OO-centric ORM. Why not look at how others have solved such technical > issues? > Why not? 1. not as fun as designing your own solution 2. just because they did it doesn't mean they did it the best way 3. spending as much effort as it takes to understand their solution is tiresome Not to say any of those reasons are sufficient to warrant the behavior of ignoring existing implementation patterns, but they ARE whys. Particularly when participating in open source development is about the engineering process - because its fun and rewarding. Its not about finding the best patterns deriving from existing solutions. We are not scientists, our time to market is almost always critical. The perception is that our time is best served by developing directly - not spending unknown quantities of time tangentially assessing the validity of other people's engineering so we can harvest useful patterns from it. > About the querying question, Hibernate and JPA (which I mentioned earlier) > have their own query languages > Whoa. Isn't that exactly what we're trying to avoid here? Independent query language syntacticals? > HQL and JPQL which somewhat resemble SQL but work with objects. I would > imagine a Moose-based DBIC would have one as well? > I would most emphatically scream, NO. Just like DBIX::Class, the 'query language' would be described through perlish data structures - no independent syntax. We have enough languages already! > If you use HQL I believe you can actually make a query that fetches all > objects who's related object's attribute X is Y, see here > http://docs.jboss.org/hibernate/core/3.3/reference/en/html/queryhql.html. > I believe it translates HQL into SQL before making the query in a > transparent way. > We have enough language syntaxes already. We do not need to invent, YET ANOTHER language. I have very strong reservations regarding the appropriateness of this kind of solution to the ORM problem. David -- "If only I could get rid of hunger by rubbing my belly" - Diogenes
_______________________________________________ List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/ Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/[email protected]
