Le 08-12-05 à 17:16, Chuck Hill a écrit :
On Dec 5, 2008, at 2:00 PM, Guido Neitzer wrote:
I wasn't really impressed by that article. It sounded like someone
complaining about all persistence frameworks at the same time
without really understanding even the first one he ever used ... or
he wouldn't write:
"For example, SQL is a very dynamic language that you can’t state
it with objects. What we see is QUERY, JOIN, WHERE objects in ORM
frameworks to re-implement SQL again in object world. We made this
mistake in our first ORM framework but corrected in second one."
I didn't read it all that thoroughly as I got the impression that
someone is whining about things he did do wrong in the first
quarter of the article. I might be wrong about that, but definitely
he wasn't able to show his understanding of the difference of all
the tools out there. And complaining about all of them at the same
time - at least you should be able to show the differences.
Well, that is one thing that people often complain about WO - there
is no current comparison to its competitors. It thought it might be
interesting to look at this this from a WO in 2008 with Wonder
perspective and see how many of his grumbles are still valid (if
they ever were).
And we do need a current comparison. It would be great to have some
RoR, PHP, .Net, etc. devs and one WO dude in some kind of competition
where people will have to complete an given spec. _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Webobjects-dev mailing list ([email protected])
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
http://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
This email sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
