Re: SQLJ Desupport

Mladen Gogala wrote:

>On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 15:58:44 -0800, Daniel Morgan wrote:
>
>
>
>>Does this mean SQLJ is dead? Not that I much care but if so ... what is
>>replacing it, if anything?
>>
>>
>
>No, it's not dead, it just smells funny. It is being replaced by perl DBI.
>Take a look at http://dbi.perl.org. Perl is portable, usually much faster
>then Java and has a huge programmers base. SQLJ was meant to be a Java
>version of PRO*C but nobody used it, because of Java bing so awkward. If
>you need quick thingies which will be portable and work withou compilation,
>perl is the ideal candidate.
>
>
>

Several reasons I suspect you are incorrect.

1. SQLJ is written inside the database. I doubt we will ever see the day Perl is used to write stored procedures.
2. Perl is not a proprietary product sold by Oracle so Oracle has absolutely no reason to promote it over something they control.

Perl may have its uses. But I doubt replacing SQLJ isn't going to be one of them.

-- 
Daniel Morgan
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/oad/oad_crs.asp
http://www.outreach.washington.edu/ext/certificates/aoa/aoa_crs.asp
damorgan_at_x.washington.edu
(replace 'x' with a 'u' to reply)