on 4/22/02 12:19 AM, "Leo Simons" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> I never said they were the same. I said that crossdb is a few generations >> behind Torque in design and thinking. > > In the sense that Torque is an object-relational tool and crossdb is not, > Torque has a newer design. That does not mean relational tools do not have > a place in Java anymore. More confusion: Torque doesn't have a 'newer design'. It has a more mature design. Torque has been around for about 3-4 years now. >> You also left out all the code related to getting the 'conn' >> object. Torque >> abstracts all that away so it isn't necessary at all. > > Which is not valid in every use case. CrossDB uses a factory. Huh? Not to grab the 'conn' object. >> Another problem with crossdb design is that you are defining all of the >> database logic within the code instead of abstracting it elsewhere. > > Which has advantages over O/R, which is the reason not everyone uses O/R > for everything. I'd say it is a choice instead of a problem. Right...like using JSP over Velocity is a choice. That said, JSP still sucks. :-) >> What is the benefit of using crossdb over Torque? > > You do not have to use an O/R layer that abstracts you away from the > database you are using so much that it limits your ability to use the > DB's functionality in something resembling a db-natural way. That is like trying to argue that using ECS is the way to write HTML. > You do not have to worry about typical O/R problems such as speed > impediments. You can use crossDB in an interactive mode (like with > BSH), while you cannot with Torque. Huh? I don't see why you can't use Torque with BSH. > I could go on and on, but I see no point. Summary: > > Torque is a persistence layer that uses O/R mapping to use a database > to provide persistence. A persistence layer is a handy tool in many > server applications. > > CrossDB is a database abstraction layer that uses the Factory and the > Builder pattern a lot which enables you to write code that works on > several databases, transparantly. You can see it as an extension to > JDBC. Database abstraction layers are useful in any application that > talks to databases. Torque is that as well...however, it doesn't use the same Factory/Builder pattern because it doesn't need to. > While these may not be accurate summaries, I hope you now do see that > CrossDB and Torque are not, in the majority of use cases, alternatives > to one another. I'm sorry. I don't see that. Torque can do everything crossdb can do and more. -jon -- Nixon: "At least with liquor, I don't lose motivation." -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
