5 ms·

This remix of ScalaQuery looks okay, but when I was evaluating the options back in 2011 I chose Squeryl and I don't see anything greater being offered here yet.

This remix of ScalaQuery looks okay, but when I was evaluating the options back in 2011 I chose Squeryl and I don't see anything greater being offered here yet. I'll check back in a few months. Disclaimer: I have given presentations on and contributed to Squeryl. However, if I find something better I'll happily switch.. but it'd have to /really/ be better, not just "newer" or stamped out by TypeSafe.

meddlepal 14y ago
Can you elaborate, if you have a moment, on the reasons you chose Squeryl over ScalaQuery/Slick and why you feel it's better?
weego 14y ago
We saw the demo and presentation of Slick at Scala Exchange 2012 and it was really a bit of a "huh?" moment. It felt a little like being shown a query engine from a previous software generation... I agree that I can't really see anything compelling at all about Slick. Add to that the fact that at the presentation they were talking about looking into "ideas" on how to support NoSQL stores made it all feel fairly uninspiring overall.
eeperson 14y ago
My understanding of what Slick offers over something like Squeryl (which I admit I don't know super well so correct me if I'm wrong) is that it's queries can be generalized over many different data stores and is not just limited to SQL. This is why there are plans to release other backends in the future, such as MongoDB. It is able to accomplish this by constructing queries through monadic composition[1]. This an idea that has already been shown to be fairly successful with Microsoft's LINQ[2]. [1]http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2011/4/106584-a-co-relational-model-of-data-for-large-shared-data-banks/fulltext http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2011/4/106584-a-co-relational-... [2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_Integrated_Query http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_Integrated_Query EDIT: clarity

meddlepal 14y ago

Can you elaborate, if you have a moment, on the reasons you chose Squeryl over ScalaQuery/Slick and why you feel it's better?

weego 14y ago

We saw the demo and presentation of Slick at Scala Exchange 2012 and it was really a bit of a "huh?" moment. It felt a little like being shown a query engine from a previous software generation... I agree that I can't really see anything compelling at all about Slick. Add to that the fact that at the presentation they were talking about looking into "ideas" on how to support NoSQL stores made it all feel fairly uninspiring overall.

eeperson 14y ago

My understanding of what Slick offers over something like Squeryl (which I admit I don't know super well so correct me if I'm wrong) is that it's queries can be generalized over many different data stores and is not just limited to SQL. This is why there are plans to release other backends in the future, such as MongoDB. It is able to accomplish this by constructing queries through monadic composition[1]. This an idea that has already been shown to be fairly successful with Microsoft's LINQ[2]. [1]http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2011/4/106584-a-co-relational-model-of-data-for-large-shared-data-banks/fulltext http://cacm.acm.org/magazines/2011/4/106584-a-co-relational-... [2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_Integrated_Query http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Language_Integrated_Query EDIT: clarity