Remember any programming problem can be solved by adding another layer of
indirection. <g>
Jim
"Galen Boyer" <galenboyer_at_hotpop.com> wrote in message
news:uel83fp7w.fsf_at_standardandpoors.com...
> On Fri, 27 Dec 2002, gooiditweg_at_nospam.demon.nl wrote:
> > On 27 Dec 2002 08:23:12 -0600, Galen Boyer
> > <galenboyer_at_hotpop.com> wrote:
> >
> >> If the J2EE guys could just think of the database as one big
> >>static class offering up methods then we would all be okay.
> >>:-)
> >
> >
> > So far I have yet to see the first piece of robust,
> > *documented*, J2EE driven software, not using hardcoded
> > literals everywhere.
>
> I have to say, this is just too true. I start my new job. I
> read the PL/SQL guidelines and it says point blank, use bind
> variables. I'm thinking to myself, excellent, these guys are
> stressing the correct things. Then, I take a look at some of
> the java code and there is dynamic SQL being built in the java
> code that doesn't bind its "WHERE" criterion. I then look at
> the "FRAMEWORK's" code for executing sql and the only thing it
> accepts is a string. The "FRAMEWORK" doesn't even support
> binding variables from java. I go point this out to the internal
> "FRAMEWORK" guys and their jaws drop. The "FRAMEWORK" guys got
> it correct when thinking of stored PL/SQL, but somehow, dynamic
> SQL generated in java code gets treated differently and goes
> through a different engine than SQL that might be sitting on the
> server? Arghhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
> > It looks like J2EE guys first need to learn to *think* rather
> > than to rush ahead and start hacking
>
> The J2EE guys need to remember that database independence is just
> for the code. It doesn't give you the right to be DATABASE
> IGNORANT!
>
> --
> Galen Boyer
Received on Fri Dec 27 2002 - 18:23:05 CST
