Thanks Mattias, Yeah, intuitively, I do feel "symbols all the way down" makes Picolisp uniquely at an advantageous position. It would be good to be equipped with a way to articulate this advantage. Regards, Kashyap
On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 11:28 AM Mattias Sundblad <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Kashyap! > > Thank you for posting many good examples on the mailing list, and > welcome to the PicoLisp world! > > > There is a plethora of ORM systems such as ActiveRecords (in Ruby/Rails) > or > > Microsoft EntityFramework and similar solutions in other languages where > > Objects are mapped to SQL DB records. > > My thoughts on this subject is that ORM systems such as ActiveRecord and > EntityFramework are there to map different technologies to one another, > but the > database in PicoLisp is "just" another form of symbols. > > ActiveRecord would map rows in a SQL database to Ruby objects and back, but > there is not such a big difference between external and internal symbols in > PicoLisp. Here, we have "symbols all the way down" instead of having to > "massage" data between quite different forms. > > Personally, I find the Pil database one of the big advantages of the > language. There is no longer any need to install, setup and administer a > SQL database. I do not have context switch between objects on the one > hand and tables and rows on the other. There is suddenly a consistent > world to work in :) > > Best regards, > > Mattias > > > -- > UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe >
