I had a task to write a web interface to a table with 300 columns. The column names were still in flux. I really did not feel to write 300 elaborate column definitions. XML is very readable, but it was too verbose for me at the time.
And as you say, it looks a very daunting task and that's what most starting users probably think. And if they, because of that, start with xsp and esql (which admittedly is very easy) the going forth to yet another language and framework can be inconvenient. Especially when you get paid to write applications, not learn frameworks:)
But I'm glad to hear that Hibernate is quite easy to start with. The moment I get some time off I will certainly jump in the deep and try to survive:)
Leon
Leszek Gawron wrote:
On Mon, Apr 19, 2004 at 12:32:38PM +0200, Leon Widdershoven wrote:
To me, hibernate is overkill and yet another thing to manage. The advantage of esql is that it is simple, and has a single layer access to the database.
Hibernate is more complicated to set up, and then has to be maintained. If you use plain SQL, only the queries have to be maintained. If you use hibernate, it also has to be maintained.
For plain old statements like select * from foo where bla=<xsp:request.../> it's just overkill to me.
I do think hibernate is very good - for advanced usage. I think it is a shame that people are forced to either use xsp or use plain java.sql access to the database in flowscript.
You are not right. Setting up hibernate and writing first application consisting of 5 tables took me 1 hour. For two weeks I been gathering strength to do that because I've been as scared as you are :) lg
