Rick Olson rather :)

-Nb

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 Nathaniel S. H. Brown                           http://nshb.net 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf 
> Of Nathaniel S. H. Brown
> Sent: February 13, 2006 8:29 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected]
> Subject: RE: [Rails-core] "ActiveRecord" for Non-SQL Data Sources?
> 
> This seems a little OT, but you might find it useful.
> 
> Emil Marceta, a local Ruby guy here in Vancouver wrote this 
> post to the vanruby.com mailing list.
> 
> http://lists.vanruby.com/pipermail/discuss/2006-January/000050.html
> 
> It describes how to use ActiveRecord's validations against 
> table-less data model based on Rick Olsen's code here:
> 
> http://rails.techno-weenie.net/tip/2005/11/19/validate_your_fo
> rms_with_a_tab
> le_less_model
> 
> -Nb
> 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>  Nathaniel S. H. Brown                           http://nshb.net 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>  
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf 
> Of Kevin 
> > Clark
> > Sent: February 13, 2006 8:16 PM
> > To: [email protected]
> > Subject: Re: [Rails-core] "ActiveRecord" for Non-SQL Data Sources?
> > 
> > Ernie,
> > I think it is great that you were able to modify 
> ActiveRecord for you 
> > needs.  You might want to pull your changes into a plugin 
> where others 
> > could easily use your new code. That being said, I don't think 
> > something like this would go well in core. Plugins were created 
> > exactly for this situation though, so all is well.
> > Kev
> > 
> > On 2/13/06, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >
> > > I'm trying to do something a wee bit crazy, and would love
> > to get your
> > > combined wisdom on how to proceed.  I've looking at ways to
> > get Rails
> > > working with Mac OS X's CoreData framework:
> > >
> > > http://www.opendarwin.org/~drernie/B2126242314/C499496031/
> > > E20051019100520/index.html
> > >
> > > When I asked DHH about Active Record, he replied:
> > >
> > > On Jan 3, 2006, at 9:04 PM, David Heinemeier Hansson wrote:
> > > > Active Record is very deeply tied to SQL. By design. 
> Non-SQL data 
> > > > sources should just create their own AR-flavored framework. See 
> > > > ActiveLDAP as an example: http://rubyforge.org/projects/ruby-
> > > > activeldap/
> > >
> > > So, I looked at ActiveLDAP, and was rather disappointed.  
> Not as a 
> > > criticism of them, but compared to ActiveRecord it didn't
> > have all the
> > > bells-and-whistles I was looking for, such as:
> > >
> > > . conventions for automatically mapping classes onto
> > back-end entities
> > > . flexible method names for accessing attributes . 
> > dynamically-loaded
> > > adapter plug-ins for various datastores
> > >
> > > After trying various options (such as cut-and-paste and
> > refactoring),
> > > I reluctantly concluded that the simplest way to achieve my
> > goal would
> > > be to simply replace the SQL portions of ActiveRecord with a more 
> > > general "query" mechanism:
> > >
> > > http://www.opendarwin.org/~drernie/B2126242314/C499496031/
> > > E20060105103606/index.html
> > >
> > > Of course, this solution is itself problematic.  The
> > simplest solution
> > > (copy and then cut) would result in my duplicating huge 
> amounts of 
> > > ActiveRecord code -- which I understand poorly, and would surely 
> > > bitrot.
> > >
> > > The only alternative, it would seem, would be to abstract
> > away the SQL
> > > dependence of ActiveRecord -- the very thing DHH warned
> > > against.   So, despite full knowledge that "fools rush in where
> > > angels fear to tread", I decided to give it a shot, to at least 
> > > estimate the difficulty. The results are here:
> > >
> > > http://www.opendarwin.org/~drernie/src/ActiveRecord-nonSQL.zip
> > >
> > > I have to say, it actually wasn't all that bad. There's
> > only a finite
> > > set of methods that actually generate SQL, which I changed
> > to operate
> > > on a generic "query" object. There's some subtleties
> > involved in how
> > > to handle quoting, and of course app-generated SQL would 
> only work 
> > > with an SQL-based adapter, but (at least for me) that would be an 
> > > acceptable tradeoff.  As a side-benefit, it seems to me that this 
> > > might actually simplify the development of adaptors, while still 
> > > maintaining backward compatibility.
> > >
> > > Of course, if people actively override the affected methods
> > to change
> > > the semantics and regenerate SQL, such patches would become
> > horribly
> > > broken, which means this proposal would be dead in the 
> water.  But 
> > > perhaps it is anyway.
> > >
> > > That's why I'm asking, to see how people feel about this
> > approach, and
> > > find out whether there's a better way to achieve my goals,
> > or whether
> > > I just have to scale back my ambitions.
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > -- Ernie P._______________________________________________
> > > Rails-core mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-core
> > >
> > 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Rails-core mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-core
> 

_______________________________________________
Rails-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails-core

Reply via email to