From: James Britt <james_b@...>
Date: 2005-10-27T06:57:12+09:00
Subject: Re: The "perfect" ORM?

Adam Van Den Hoven wrote:
> I'm not sure if this is relevant but in my opinion the perfect ORM is  
> no ORM.
> 
> Why do we think we need ORM? Why do we build wonderful things like  Rails?
> 
> Because our applications have objects and we need to persist those  
> objects in a useful way.  We want to be able to find those objects  and  
> change them and save them.
> 
> Personally, I'm willing to sacrifice a LOT to get really simple  object 
> persistence. Then again I'm not writing applications that need  to 
> handle tens of thousands of object finds every second.
> 
> I would love to be able to do something like:
> 
> class Person < ActiveObject::Base
>     field :last_name, String
>     field :first_name, String
>     has_many :aliases, String
>     transient :some_transient_value
>     belongs_to :team
>     has_many_ordered :roles
> 
>     #methods and the like
> end

Looks like Og.  Except you can leave out the inheritance part

http://www.nitrohq.com


James

-- 

http://www.ruby-doc.org - The Ruby Documentation Site
http://www.rubyxml.com  - News, Articles, and Listings for Ruby & XML
http://www.rubystuff.com - The Ruby Store for Ruby Stuff
http://www.jamesbritt.com  - Playing with Better Toys