Greetings Ladies and Gentlemen, I tend to agree with Chuck on the notion that this could be a costly marriage without some kind of stability assurance. My recommendation would be to have Cayenne be standardized so that at least there is both proper documentation and be able to say what Cayenne is intended to be (EOF like or otherwise).
I did some work on the subject whether WO/EOF is still king of the ORMs for my dissertation qualifiers in November of 2011. I found that while there is no notion of a standardized ORM out there, EOF has a de facto standard due to its age and open source varieties in both Objective-C and Java forms. I can see why Apple has been reluctant to take it to a standards body. Namely, why teach the whole industry how to build something that makes your company so successful. None the less, there are enough of us that could easily reverse engineer EOF along with Cayenne to help formalize such a standard with say the Open Grid Forum (OGF). Of course, there is probably nothing that can be done about the language of choice. According to the TIOBE index, the three most popular languages as far as applications built by them are in order C, Java, and Objective-C. Popularity does not necessarily give us good languages from an academic point of view, but there are some blessings to be had from those top three. Of course, Objective-C did rise this last month to surpass C++, C#, PHP, and Visual Basic. What does Chuck say if people are using those languages, of their own free will? V/R, Dan Beatty, Ph.D. Texas Tech University, Alumni dan.bea...@mac.com https://sites.google.com/site/allnightstarparty/home (806)438-6620 On Jul 11, 2012, at 1:20 PM, arosenzw...@clinworx.com wrote: > Hi WOrriors, > > I have mixed feelings. > > It's obvious when you look at Cayenne the original developers had used EOF > before and wanted to make an open source clone. They also wanted to make it > better, if possible, than EOF. > > It's been a while but when I looked at it I was put off by some things. They > questioned "Why do you need, *addObjectsToBothSidesOfRelationshipWithKey()*" > So they just made it automatic that when you set a relationship it always > does both sides. You don't need to call a special method. But in my mind, > sometimes you don't like the way the model was made and may not want to start > a war with another engineer that created an ugly back relationship. You can, > in EOF, choose when you truly want to bring in both sides of the object graph > and when you don't want to. > > John surely knows more than I, and it probably is the closest fit to EOF that > you can find anywhere and is probably superior to EOF in many ways. > > It was really nice to see nobody lamenting and begging for Apple to change > things. It was really cool to see Chuck ask for a show of hands to say "Let's > rewrite WO and make it truly ours." It's exciting, yes, but I'm still torn. > > Has someone moved our cheese? (taking a nod to Paul Yu) > > WO / EOF is working reasonably well for us. We are still assuming that this > remains the ultimate way to develop Internet apps. Has any of us truly looked > elsewhere? I mean, if it is still king then it might be worth the effort to > get a truly open-source base that we can all be proud of. > > For me WO / EOF was a couple of things. It was simple to install and deploy > back in the .dmg days. It's harder now. It was also a really cool abstraction > above RDBMS. You can almost truly feel that you are working with objects even > though they are persisted in a relational data store. As perfect as this > mapping layer is, it still has some hiccups. It can never be as clean as if > you were saving true objects directly in your object database. > > Sacrilege, yes! I do have a wandering eye. I wonder why must I still use > Object-Relational mapping tools, EOF / Cayenne / or otherwise. It's 2012, I > want to save my objects as objects and migrate them too. I don't want a > mapping layer anymore. I want to use Gemstone or something like it. > > I don't want a java dialect (WO) that feels a bit like SmallTalk. I don't > want an Objective-C that feels a bit like SmallTalk. I don't want dead > languages. Yes, Eclipse makes java code almost come alive but it's more like > the "living dead" or the "undead." I want my objects alive all the time. I > don't want some bloated app like Eclipse to puff up my objects and pretend > they are alive. I want fully integrated tools that just work including > distributed version control, etc. I want the real SmallTalk. While other > languages are dead, Smalltalk is a living language that refuses to die. It is > uber productive. It's the xombi of the object oriented languages. > > I wonder if our collective talents and efforts might be better aimed at some > cheesier cheese. Seaside could make for a better way to WO. > > -- Aaron > > Message: 4 > Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 11:35:48 -0700 > From: Chuck Hill <ch...@global-village.net> > To: Theodore Petrosky <tedp...@yahoo.com> > Cc: webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com > Subject: Re: Migrating from EOF to Cayenne > Message-ID: <78867b57-6ba2-4dbf-816f-c783eac33...@global-village.net> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 > > I agree that we need to more closely examine Cayenne before jumping in with > both feet. How mature are the tools? What is the functionality gap? How > important is the missing functionality? How costly is adding any needed > functionality? Will the missing functionality fit in with the Cayenne > architecture? How stable is it? How well does it scale (scaling is more > than multi-threaded EOF)? And Cayenne is only EOAccess/EOControl. What do > we do about the presentation layer? Getting rid of 2/3 of WO still leaves > you with WO. > > > Chuck > > _______________________________________________ > Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. > Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) > Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: > https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/danielbeatty%40mac.com > > This email sent to danielbea...@mac.com
_______________________________________________ Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored. Webobjects-dev mailing list (Webobjects-dev@lists.apple.com) Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription: https://lists.apple.com/mailman/options/webobjects-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com This email sent to arch...@mail-archive.com
