3 ms·
I said it once many years ago and I still say it: "ORMs are for people who don't know SQL" However, I understand the problem it tries to solve: Object-Relation
by vladsanchez 4y ago
I said it once many years ago and I still say it: "ORMs are for people who don't know SQL"
However, I understand the problem it tries to solve: Object-Relational Impedance Mismatch. I only wish there were other idioms, not the convolution of classes and mappers.
- ttymck 4y agoI've never said this before but I'll say it now: "'ORMs are for people who don't know SQL' is usually said by people who have never written a complex application." I agree that ORMs are dangerous and clumsy for a number of use cases, but the query-building aspect is indispensable in many scenarios. Unfortunately, the query builder is usually tightly coupled to the ORM, but _if you do know SQL_ then you can use the ORM sensibly and performantly.
- vladsanchez 4y agoI sustain and refute your claim that I've not written complex apps. They just don't have to be complicated, which is what most ORMs bring, and has been my experience. Complex don't mean complicated.
- ttymck 4y agoAgree to disagree then. I find ORMs to be enormously helpful more often than not, if not without perils, and I know SQL.
- yencabulator 4y agoYou can have a query builder without an ORM.