Path: csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!news.glorb.com!peer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!post02.iad.highwinds-media.com!fx03.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Arved Sandstrom User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: ORMs comparisons/complaints. References: <%JGtu.29103$Wm1.26832@fx17.iad> <52c4d306$0$302$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <52c615a8$0$302$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <1evcc9hl6mk3gh5slh1r2ovjfmhutsl63e@4ax.com> <52c7252c$0$303$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> In-Reply-To: <52c7252c$0$303$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Lines: 41 Message-ID: X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsgroups-download.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2014 21:44:49 UTC Organization: Public Usenet Newsgroup Access Date: Fri, 03 Jan 2014 17:44:49 -0400 X-Received-Bytes: 3071 X-Received-Body-CRC: 1023708211 Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:27219 On 01/03/2014 05:01 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote: > On 1/3/2014 10:58 AM, lipska the kat wrote: >> On 03/01/14 15:34, Arved Sandstrom wrote: >>> I may sound a bit like the kid who claimed that the emperor had no >>> clothes, but let's be real: the object model is *not* broken when you >>> deal with relational. >> >> Bollocks, and I mean that most sincerely, If you *really* think about it >> and you're *really* honest with yourself can you think of one single >> time when you designed a system that you *knew beforehand would persist >> it's data in an RDBMS* where this knowledge didn't in some way, however >> sub-consciously impact the decisions you made when you were designing >> that system? > > I think this may be a very good example of the type of argument that > Arved was thinking about. > > 1) There is really nothing sub-consciously flowing. If you do code > first, then you do the object model exactly like you would if it > were not to be persisted - there really is not any room for > influence from persistence - attributes and associations are > given by the problem domain. If you do database first, then > the object model is completely and very consciously determined > by the relational model. > 2) Even in the cases where the relational model do impact the object > model, then that does not mean that the object model is broken. > 3) And even if the object model were broken, then that would not > be any different with plain JDBC than ORM. > > Arne > Thank you, Arne, you just summarized my thinking much better than I myself did. As you pointed out better and more succinctly than I did, use of an ORM, as opposed to JDBC and SQL, cannot have less or more of an influence on object design. AHS -- When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him. -- Jonathan Swift