On May 13, 2009, at 3:37 PM, Michael Schuerig wrote: > Still, I think there biggest issues with ActiveRecord is something > else: > It is basically gluing together bits and pieces of generated and > provided SQL without much concept of what it is doing. > > Try anything interesting involving associations, scopes, and a few > joins. You either end up with too many joins between the same tables > or > duplicate aliases the DBMS is going to complain about. What about > those > naming conventions when the same table occurs multiple times? > > ARec needs to take a step back from concrete SQL strings, toward > abstract models of the various SQL statements. This (huge) step would > allow for better modularity, customizability, and easier expression of > programmer intention. I have no idea how to introduce a change such as > this as it would surely void backward compatibility. Sigh, only > dreaming.
Indeed, we've been talking about this for a long time. And Nick Kallen started the work required to do this with ActiveRelation. Emilio Tagua is doing a GSOC project this summer to integrate ARel into AR. Also, Nathan Sobo's Unison is a very interesting take on integrating a relational algebra into AR associations (which I think he started as an offshoot of ARel). -- Josh Susser http://blog.hasmanythrough.com Golden Gate Ruby Conf :: April 17-18 :: http://gogaruco.com --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Core" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-core@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-core+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-core?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
