Seen this article on TheServerSide: here.
Product page: http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/jooq
How should we react when reading posts like this in 2010?
It's like being back 15 years earlier.
How is that possible to write so many irrelevant statements in a single post?
The so-called "pragmatic" approach has given birth to so many useless frameworks like this one.
The good news is there is still a need for a comprehensive data manipulation solution.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi Eric
ReplyDeleteThe feedback I had both on the server side, as well as by direct contact was rather positive. Especially considering the fact that many people think, that ORM (including JPA/EJB3) is going the wrong way for their needs, in terms of complexity and SQL abstraction (see lots of articles about ORM impedance mismatch)
Whether jOOQ will make it to the "big ones" is clearly questionable. But I still believe that jOOQ is original in a way that it does not abstract SQL alltogether.
As you put it, there is still need for such solutions. And maybe, someone like you (contributing to the big standards) will pick up one or two ideas from the so-called "useless" frameworks. That's happened before.
Cheers
Lukas
Hi.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Lukas that JPA 2 went partially into the wrong direction. Especially with the Criteria API.
Pragmatic approaches are needed. Standards should evolve from practice and not be dictated like with the JPA 2 Criteria API which is verbose, complex and difficult to read.
For a querying alternative for JPA checkout Querydsl if you haven't yet.