Re: JDO comparisons

hi eric,

Eric Samson schrieb:

<snip>

> we all know the very simplistic RDBMS storage mechanism is very
> flexible in terms of queries and so on.

fine.

> But the result set of a query on a table with 2 columns or more is
> definitely not what an object programmer would call a Collection !

from a conceptual point of view the two colums table can very well regarded as a collection data member and the three colums table can be regarded as a map data member. and it remains a fact that SQL can deal with that very good whereas JDO's ql cannot.

and, if you look at java.sql.ResultSet and java.util.Iterator they don't look very similar at first glance but an iteration through a result set is very similar to an iteration through a collection type.

> RDBMS are very expressive, but very badly integrated in object
> languages.

of course.

> This is what JDO solves (fully transparent integration within Java).

but the query language as it stands today is far from beeing as powerful as SQL is. and i expect from a query language that it is (nearly) as powerful as SQL if it want's to be taken serious.

regards

        robert

-- 
Robert Klemme
Software Engineer
-------------------------------------------------------------
myview technologies GmbH & Co. KG
Riemekestraße 160 ~ D-33106 Paderborn ~ Germany
E-Mail: mailto:robert.klemme_at_myview.de
Telefon: +49/5251/69090-321 ~ Fax: +49/5251/69090-399
-------------------------------------------------------------