Re:OO is not Computing, Newer is not More modern
by UK-AL on Monday April 30, 2012 @09:41AM
(#3909178)
Yes of course ORMS use relational systems order the hood, everyone knows that. Relational Databases are easy to use, but that's not the problem. The problem comes from interfaceing the two different systems together. That's the problem. ORMS allow you to remove boilerplate, such manually populating objects, or connection code or whatever and still access relational features. They don't force you to use PURE OO to access data. If you wanted that you'd use a object database... They've existed for years.
ORMS allow you to use those relational features(HQL, LINQ), except without the boilerplate of manually populating objects, connecting to the database or whatever...
Nearly every search you perform via orm, uses relational operations...
Re:OO is not Computing, Newer is not More modern
by eli_gottlieb on Monday April 30, 2012 @11:08AM
(#3909557)
If you're looking to replace a relational database, then you're looking for orthogonal persistence.
You answered the question as if that really was the only many-to-many relationship in the system. I observe that it is only an exemplar, and that in practice any real system is shot through with similar relationships, and the answer isn't to implement each one of them in OO.
If you're using an ORM, btw, you're using a relational system under the hood, which is my point. You seemed to be implying pure OO had answers to that problem, and it really doesn't unless it imports a foreign paradigm like a relational database. If that wasn't your intent, then we're in agreement.