PHWinfo banniere

Titres
PORTAIL ANNUAIRE ARTICLES COMPARATEUR HÉBERGEURS DEVIS FORUMS RÉDUCTEUR D'URL
Précédent   PHWinfo > Autres forums > Forum Programmation & Conception > comp.lang.ruby > Limitations of all Ruby ORMs
S'inscrire FAQ Membres Recherche Messages du jour Marquer les forums comme lus
Limitations of all Ruby ORMs

Réponse
 
LinkBack Outils de la discussion
Vieux 08/06/2008, 17h57   #1
Alexey Petrushin
Aucun Avatar
 
Messages: n/a
Hébergeur:
Par défaut Limitations of all Ruby ORMs

Hello, last days i investigated three ORM frameworks: ActiveRecords,
DataMapper and Og.
And found that they all shares almost same limitations (when i write
'support' i mean that tool allows to solve task 'simply' and
'effectively').

1. Inheritance support.
None of these frameworks hasn't inheritance support. You forced either
by 'single table inheritance' (suitable only for similar objects) or you
can use 'multiple tables' but lose polymorphism ('Parent.find(...)'
searches only in 'parent' table and do not searches in his children's
tables).

2. 'General reference'.
So, one object can make reference to any other object. For example
'Catalog' has 'content' reference, that references 'Article', 'Image',
'File'.
ActiveRecords - support, Og - partly, DM not, as far as i know.

3. Single ID space.
The continuation to 'General reference'. Ability to find object only by
his ID.
db.find(ID)
No matter is it Article, User or something else.

I really miss these features :-(.

The question is - is there any materials or article with explanations
how to implement all these features the best way?

Thanks!
--
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.

  Réponse avec citation
Vieux 08/06/2008, 18h09   #2
Charles Oliver Nutter
Aucun Avatar
 
Messages: n/a
Hébergeur:
Par défaut Re: Limitations of all Ruby ORMs

Alexey Petrushin wrote:
> Hello, last days i investigated three ORM frameworks: ActiveRecords,
> DataMapper and Og.
> And found that they all shares almost same limitations (when i write
> 'support' i mean that tool allows to solve task 'simply' and
> 'effectively').
>
> 1. Inheritance support.
> 2. 'General reference'.
> 3. Single ID space.


Does Hibernate have all these features? Because there's an
ActiveHibernate project out there currently not moving forward. I'd love
to see some folks continue working on it, putting a nice Ruby face on
top of Hibernate.

http://code.google.com/p/activehibernate/

- Charlie

  Réponse avec citation
Vieux 12/07/2008, 07h57   #3
Sam Smoot
Aucun Avatar
 
Messages: n/a
Hébergeur:
Par défaut Re: Limitations of all Ruby ORMs

On Jun 8, 11:57am, Alexey Petrushin <axy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello, last days i investigated three ORM frameworks: ActiveRecords,DataMapperand Og.
> And found that they all shares almost same limitations (when i write
> 'support' i mean that tool allows to solve task 'simply' and
> 'effectively').
>
> 1. Inheritance support.
> None of these frameworks hasn't inheritance support. You forced either
> by 'single table inheritance' (suitable only for similar objects) or you
> can use 'multiple tables' but lose polymorphism ('Parent.find(...)'
> searches only in 'parent' table and do not searches in his children's
> tables).
>
> 2. 'General reference'.
> So, one object can make reference to any other object. For example
> 'Catalog' has 'content' reference, that references 'Article', 'Image',
> 'File'.
> ActiveRecords - support, Og - partly, DM not, as far as i know.
>
> 3. Single ID space.
> The continuation to 'General reference'. Ability to find object only by
> his ID.
> db.find(ID)
> No matter is it Article, User or something else.
>
> I really miss these features :-(.
>
> The question is - is there any materials or article with explanations
> how to implement all these features the best way?
>
> Thanks!
> --
> Posted viahttp://www.ruby-forum.com/.


1. Agreed. We'd (DataMapper) like to support all 3 forms, but it'll
probably be post-1.0.

2. Yes, this is possible. It's probably not all that hard either. Just
haven't come across a personal use-case.

3. Technically, same as above, but it just looks crazy to me. I don't
see DM ever supporting this, and I'd be surprised if Hibernate did
either (though I could be wrong).

So for DM at least, number 2 would involve making the Query object
accept multiple models. Easy enough. Then it's conditions and field
and links, etc methods would need to accept a model as a parameter so
the method could return the properties (table/column information)
specific to that model. Then the DataObjectsAdapter would simply map
each model in the Query object to SQL and perform a join for a UNION
statement. It would be the Query object's responsibility to pad out
uneven fields between it's models.

And that's that. I don't see it taking more than a day to implement at
most.

But again, DM's features are driven by the people willing to scratch
an itch. If that sounds like you, feel free to drop on the IRC channel
(irc.freenode.net#datamapper). As the Rubinius guys say: If you can
breath, you can get commit access.

-Sam
  Réponse avec citation
Réponse


Outils de la discussion

Règles de messages
Vous ne pouvez pas créer de nouvelles discussions
Vous ne pouvez pas envoyer des réponses
Vous ne pouvez pas envoyer des pièces jointes
Vous ne pouvez pas modifier vos messages

Les balises BB sont activées : oui
Les smileys sont activés : oui
La balise [IMG] est activée : oui
Le code HTML peut être employé : non
Trackbacks are oui
Pingbacks are oui
Refbacks are oui


Fuseau horaire GMT +1. Il est actuellement 03h39.


Édité par : vBulletin® version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5 Tous droits réservés.
Version française #16 par l'association vBulletin francophone
PHWinfo est un site Éducation Sans Frontières
Ad Management by RedTyger
©Tous droits réservés par les parties respectives
Page generated in 0,10261 seconds with 11 queries