Alan Chandler wrote:
http://home.chandlerfamily.org.uk/archive/26/ibatis-v-hiberbate)
<Quote>
In simple terms, Hibernate maps Java Objects to database tables.
iBatis maps Java Objects to SQL statements.
</Quote>
Hang on a sec here, don't we also map Java Classes to database tables
with iBatis? A User class
in my design maps to a User table in the database. Isn't this exactly
how the iBatis docs tell us
we should map our result beans?
Even though we have the ability to get results like COUNT, AVERAGE etc
from separate statements
in iBatis, 90% of our usage will be based on the Class-to-Table mapping
mentality - exactly the
starting point of an ORM tool.
So, given that situation, we are left with the challenges inherent in
the Class-to-Table paradigm. (IMO, the
remainder of the ORM conundrum!) :-) A challenge that arises when
departing from the concept of
handling data as SETS not objects!
