On Mon, Jan 13, 2003 at 01:31:31PM -0500, Chris Felaco wrote:
[snip summary of a handful of Torque's current problems]

Torque initially lured me to Turbine as the concept is great, but
the implementation is bad. I agree with everything you mentioned,
especially the Village point, and I was all fired up to fix such
things when I came into Turbine.

Since then, I've learned a lot both about myself (as per Dan's
recent post, I find myself biased towards revolutionism), and the
Torque code base. Basically, to be elegant (e.g. good, efficient,
maintainable code), Torque would require either:

- Huge amounts of evolution to incrementally fix/refactor all of the
  relatively messy issues with it (and no unit tests to help you go
by). To me this would result in such a bandaged mess as to make it
not worthwhile.

Or:

- A complete revolution starting with a new architecture complete
with the stuff like PreparedStatements, etc., and filling in the
gaps with rewritten and/or refactored existing code.

Being a revolutionist, I favor the latter. But then you end up
merely duplicating the work of already great persistance projects
like OJB and Hibernate.

Evolutionists might say Torque is salvagable as is; they could very
well be right. In fact, I hope they are, as I use it in an
application, and fairly successfully at that.

To me, the solution to the Torque problem is to make/take a generic
Java code generator, have it read in the existing Torque schemas,
and create a generic, _persistence-less_, object model with the
save()/etc. methods just being hooks into OJB to let it handle the
persistance and all the lovely issues that come with it. Then all of
the dodgy, hard-to-maintain (for me anyway) persistance code comes
out of Torque and only elegance is left (well, ideally :-).

(Sorry to be so pessimistic...if you've got the skills and time to
tackle Torque and making a dent in the bugs/issues/improvements it
needs, then please do so...lots of people will thank you, myself
included.)

- Stephen

--
To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to