5 ms·

I agree, it’s a simple tool. As mentioned in the README, it’s not a full-featured ORM, but it does more than building queries as it maps Go structs with databas

I agree, it’s a simple tool. As mentioned in the README, it’s not a full-featured ORM, but it does more than building queries as it maps Go structs with databases content (on this point I disagree as it use objects). The purpose is to be more productive than doing all this job manually. Many things can be improved, it's sill a young project. This project is initially a learning one : doing stuff to improve my skill, on my spare time. I tried to build something clean, and used it on some real data. Perhaps it could be useful for somebody else. Nothing more ;)

masklinn 10y ago
> on this point I disagree as it use objects That's a technicality, it just loads query data into objects which is what more or less every query builder does, the objects aren't involved in any of the logic. By the benchmark you use psycopg is an ORM (it really isn't, it isn't even a query builder). Don't misunderstand, I'm not saying a query builder is bad, I'm just saying this is not an ORM, and shouldn't be sold as such: it's going to disappoint people looking for ORMs like Django's or Rails's and it's going to turn off people who object to ORMs[0] but would have been interested in a query builder. Not to mention a good query builder is an excellent basis for a full-fledged ORM. [0] and there are many people who think ORMs are a terrible idea
- samonzeweb 10y ago
  We agree. In fact I did not know how to qualify * exactly * godb.
- eternalban 10y ago
  > there are many people who think ORMs are a terrible idea Not sure about terrible but it is not a bright idea to be object centric when schema remains king. Using ORMs makes perfect sense when your domain model is canonically represented by the object tier /and/ you are reusing these (common/core) domain objects to build a multiplicity of applications.
- Hannan 10y ago
  >> [0] and there are many people who think ORMs are a terrible idea Do you have any links perchance? Because I can't shake the feeling that I'm a pariah among the developer community for thinking this way.
  - sarabob 10y ago
    https://blog.codinghorror.com/object-relational-mapping-is-the-vietnam-of-computer-science/ https://blog.codinghorror.com/object-relational-mapping-is-t... for example :-)
    - Hannan 10y ago
      Excellent, thank you!
- edoceo 10y ago
  I don't like ORM in specific cases. Was looking for a query builder and almost ignored this post cause I don't need yet another ORM. Agree with rebranding as a QB, unless project intents to become ORM in the larger sense
- weberc2 10y ago
  > it just loads query data into objects which is what more or less every query builder does Query builders build queries (like SQLAlechemy's core library). ORMs know how to marshal object attributes to/from database columns. None of this is to say that one is better than the other.

masklinn 10y ago

> on this point I disagree as it use objects That's a technicality, it just loads query data into objects which is what more or less every query builder does, the objects aren't involved in any of the logic. By the benchmark you use psycopg is an ORM (it really isn't, it isn't even a query builder). Don't misunderstand, I'm not saying a query builder is bad, I'm just saying this is not an ORM, and shouldn't be sold as such: it's going to disappoint people looking for ORMs like Django's or Rails's and it's going to turn off people who object to ORMs[0] but would have been interested in a query builder. Not to mention a good query builder is an excellent basis for a full-fledged ORM. [0] and there are many people who think ORMs are a terrible idea

samonzeweb 10y ago
We agree. In fact I did not know how to qualify * exactly * godb.
eternalban 10y ago
> there are many people who think ORMs are a terrible idea Not sure about terrible but it is not a bright idea to be object centric when schema remains king. Using ORMs makes perfect sense when your domain model is canonically represented by the object tier /and/ you are reusing these (common/core) domain objects to build a multiplicity of applications.
Hannan 10y ago
>> [0] and there are many people who think ORMs are a terrible idea Do you have any links perchance? Because I can't shake the feeling that I'm a pariah among the developer community for thinking this way.
- sarabob 10y ago
  https://blog.codinghorror.com/object-relational-mapping-is-the-vietnam-of-computer-science/ https://blog.codinghorror.com/object-relational-mapping-is-t... for example :-)
  - Hannan 10y ago
    Excellent, thank you!
edoceo 10y ago
I don't like ORM in specific cases. Was looking for a query builder and almost ignored this post cause I don't need yet another ORM. Agree with rebranding as a QB, unless project intents to become ORM in the larger sense
weberc2 10y ago
> it just loads query data into objects which is what more or less every query builder does Query builders build queries (like SQLAlechemy's core library). ORMs know how to marshal object attributes to/from database columns. None of this is to say that one is better than the other.