Re: ORM comparison suggestion (was Re: [CDBI] Class::DBI vs DBIx::Class)

[prev] [thread] [next] [Date index for 2006/02/28]

On Tue, Feb 28, 2006 at 01:20:34PM +0000, William Ross wrote:
> On 28 Feb 2006, at 00:15, Tim Bunce wrote:
> 
> >On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 10:04:41AM +0000, Tim Bunce wrote:
> >>On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 01:18:20AM +0000, Matt S Trout wrote:
> >>>On Tue, Jan 17, 2006 at 10:59:34AM +1030, David Lloyd wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>DBIx::Class claims it's better than Class::DBI but I'm not sure  
> >>>>why and
> >>>>haven't found a place that gives a reasonable comparison - does  
> >>>>anyone
> >>>>know of one?
> >>>
> >>>Siracusa and I worked out one for DBIx::Class vs. Rose::DB::Object -
> >>>
> >>>http://lists.rawmode.org/pipermail/catalyst/2005-December/ 
> >>>003183.html
> >>>
> >>>although it's a little out of date. Also it's probably worth  
> >>>looking at
> >>>
> >>>http://www.spanner.org/lists/cdbi/2005/07/25/b9f7cc4c.html
> >>>
> >>>which appears to be as much of an archive of the original  
> >>>announce thread as
> >>>I can easily find.
> >>>
> >>>If nobody's going to kill me for advocacy I'd be happy to work  
> >>>with the
> >>>list on one - maybe if we aggregate them together we can sort out  
> >>>a joint
> >>>"ORM comparison guide" between the three communities or similar.
> >>
> >>I think that would be a very good idea. The current confusion isn't
> >>good for anyone.
> >
> >Any news?
> 
> Not from me :)
> 
> But I have been thinking about this, and I'd like to suggest that we  
> devise a yardstick, in the form of a simple and useful application  
> that would provide:
> 
> * a fixed reference point for comparing different approaches. Eg  
> 'with cdbi this part is done for you, whereas with Rose you have to  
> specify it in code, but as a result it's cleaner and you save this  
> many queries', or whatever.
> 
> * a practical tutorial for people new to ORM or to a particular package
> 
> * a source of real-world benchmarks
> 
> * a platform on which to place practical documentation and how-to guides
> 
> * a way of structuring the problem space so that it is easy to  
> express questions and answers in a generic way (like, but more  
> extensive than, the Class::DBI docs' usefully consistent references  
> to albums and artists and so on)
> 
> * a cargo-friendly starting point for small applications...
> 
> * ...and an encapsulation of relevant best practice
> 
> * a basis for platform and package evangelism
> 
> * a useful way of looking at migration between ORM solutions
> 
> * golfing fun for all the family
> 
> 
> The obvious candidate is a wiki package, and let's face it, there  
> aren't enough of those[1]. So I would like to suggest a simple and  
> nicely reflexive plan:

Sounds like fun, except suddenly it's a web framework competition as well.
Which somewhat misses the point. Unless we specify one web framework, at
which stage there's an argument to be had about view processor and form
builder (at least under Catalyst, which does it's level best to not be too
opinionated about such things).

Better might be to do the Simplest Wiki Frontend Possible and define a nice
big back-end API with plenty of unit tests, then force everybody to code to
said unit tests.

        -- 
             Matt S Trout       Offering custom development, consultancy and support
  Technical Director    contracts for Catalyst, DBIx::Class and BAST. Contact
Shadowcat Systems Ltd.  mst (at) shadowcatsystems.co.uk for more information

 + Help us build a better perl ORM: http://dbix-class.shadowcatsystems.co.uk/ +