On Wednesday, October 12, 2011 08:57:54 Jacob Carlborg wrote: > On 2011-10-11 23:31, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: > > On 10/11/11 3:05 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > >> If we're talking use cases and high level interfaces I would go with > > > >> something like: > > [snip] > > > >> I recommend that everyone take a good look at ActiveRecord in Ruby on > >> Rails: > >> > >> http://guides.rubyonrails.org/active_record_querying.html > >> http://guides.rubyonrails.org/association_basics.html > >> http://guides.rubyonrails.org/active_record_validations_callbacks.html > > > > I confess the example you gave looks very foreign to me. From consulting > > http://guides.rubyonrails.org/active_record_querying.html, I see Ruby's > > active records esentially recode relational algebra in Ruby (as for the > > constructs the equivalent SQL is shown). > > Yes, exactly. The point is to have as much as possible in functions > instead of string literals and have a more Ruby like API than an SQL > looking API. > > connection.select("*").from("users"); > > instead of > > connection.execute("select * from users")
I don't know what all of the pros and cons are, since I'm not all that experienced with DB stuff, but on the surface at least, from the perspective of usability, I don't see anything better about the first one than the second one. - Jonathan M Davis
