I think the power of Databasic can be (and is certainl seen as) the problem
- esp if you are from a computer science background, yes it is more powerful
than t-sql and other languages that 'sit inside the DB' but it is nowhere
near as powerful as a full language like c#, java etc. 

In other architectures they usually use three tiers, data, business,
presentation, mvc is an example of this, or just plain asp.net web forms you
would use a dal, a bll and then your presentation. 

Because databasic has a certain amount of power we write data access and
business logic all muddled up together in there, and then if we are also
using an api many put a bit more business logic in the upper layer
(java/.net). The split is usually fairly well defined, and that's fine, but
computer scientists (who don't live in the real world btw) would say it  was
broken and needed fixing.

-----Original Message-----
From: u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org
[mailto:u2-users-boun...@listserver.u2ug.org] On Behalf Of Rob Sobers
Sent: 14 July 2011 02:26
To: U2 Users List
Subject: Re: [U2] Why Pick U2 ?

I have to heartily disagree that U2 has a sophisticated business rules
engine.  U2 Basic is such a limited language.  It barely has functions, and
you have to home brew almost everything.

Microsoft's T-SQL stored procedures are just as horrible to write as U2
Basic programs.  As Jeff Atwood put it -- "Stored procedures should be
considered database assembly language." [1] Why do you think Microsoft now
allows you to call CLR code from stored procedures?  Because it's so much
more efficient to work with the data (i.e., enforce the business rules) in a
modern language like C# that has *actual libraries* for doing useful things.

I agree that business rules shouldn't be on the client -- but who says they
have to be in the database?  Look at the ever-so-popular MVC architecture.
 The models (i.e., the code that works with the database and enforces all of
the business rules) are isolated from the views (i.e., the
client/presentation code) entirely.



On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Kevin King <precisonl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 for what David said.  Yes, there's the "limitation" that BASIC is the
> only native supported language (not factoring external connectors), but as
> a
> language native to the environment, this BASIC is really pretty rich by
> comparison to the stored procedure languages of other DBs.
> _______________________________________________
> U2-Users mailing list
> U2-Users@listserver.u2ug.org
> http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
U2-Users mailing list
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1390 / Virus Database: 1516/3762 - Release Date: 07/13/11

U2-Users mailing list

Reply via email to