On Jul 12, 2007, at 10:25 AM, Mark Ramm wrote: > Thanks for the quick response. Fundamentally the problem is your > opening line to the list which claims that those are the things which > make Storm different from other projects -- and I don't think that's > what the list is for. > > To be more specific, unless I'm reading your list wrong SQLAlchemy > does have all the "features" on your list. >
no, our native two-phase commit support is still a patch in trac, waiting to be cleaned up and implemented, and theres also some talk that we should get xa-transactions in there as well. of course theres no architectural issue that prevents SQLAlchemy from having this feature. otherwise yes the whole list, so far, has nothing unique to Storm (including test-driven development..we are up to 749 unit tests right now). Looking over the tutorial there are various features and behaviors of the Store which we can also implement if people express a desire for them...also i havent yet seen a whole host of features SQLAlchemy has, such as ad-hoc eager loading, all three kinds of class inheritance, polymorphic loading, cyclical foreign-key relationships, self-referential relationships, mapping to selects and joins, custom types, composite types, etc., but im sure some or all of these will be revealed soon. im also looking forward to seeing the details of how Storm does object/row-level multidatabase access, which is another feature which we do not yet have implemented....we'll be sure to evaluate its design for clues towards our own approach. i think the differences, as Gustavo mentioned, will come down to stylistic choices and individual case histories. you can post a lot of brags on your site about "we're the ONLY ORM TO DO THIS", but more sophisticated users will see right through it (and Python is, after all, a sophisticated set of users. its why I chose this language). -- storm mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/storm
