Received: by 10.66.84.202 with SMTP id b10mr2631734paz.43.1350248680885;
        Sun, 14 Oct 2012 14:04:40 -0700 (PDT)
X-BeenThere: play-framework@googlegroups.com
Received: by 10.68.189.162 with SMTP id gj2ls16300832pbc.6.gmail; Sun, 14 Oct
 2012 14:04:34 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.229.231 with SMTP id st7mr2173036pbc.2.1350248674376;
        Sun, 14 Oct 2012 14:04:34 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2012 14:04:33 -0700 (PDT)
From: Erem Boto <e...@egraphs.com>
To: play-framework@googlegroups.com
Message-Id: <af56016d-f0ae-4ccf-ae3c-646d7264ae20@googlegroups.com>
In-Reply-To: <0896df91-09db-4e63-aaff-460d523a4399@googlegroups.com>
References: <0896df91-09db-4e63-aaff-460d523a4399@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [2.0-scala] recommended ORM?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; 
	boundary="----=_Part_1000_31765949.1350248673951"

------=_Part_1000_31765949.1350248673951
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; 
	boundary="----=_Part_1001_26233941.1350248673953"

------=_Part_1001_26233941.1350248673953
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Squeryl is awesome for an ORM and type-safe query language. For the most 
part it just stays out of the way of your models. The 0.9.6 version will be 
even better when it starts using typeclasses for object persistence. Then 
your models will need literally no ORM annotation, which is sweet.

Slick looks like a really nice alternative to anorm for processing 
resultsets from hand-written SQL, but its ORM syntax looks more obtrusive 
than Squeryl's IMHO. Also it won't be available in your Play applications 
unless you're using 2.1-SNAPSHOT.

The downside to Squeryl is that it has no real institutional support, which 
makes me nervous using it, but the few developers on the project are 
excellent and very responsive.

Erem

On Thursday, September 20, 2012 12:24:09 AM UTC-7, Trung Pham wrote:
>
> What ORM do you recommend to use with Play2 Scala?
> Is there anything that is comparable to ActiveRecord/Ruby?
>
> Thanks.
>

------=_Part_1001_26233941.1350248673953
Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Squeryl is awesome for an ORM and type-safe query language. For the most pa=
rt it just stays out of the way of your models. The 0.9.6 version will be e=
ven better when it starts using typeclasses for object persistence. Then yo=
ur models will need literally no ORM annotation, which is sweet.<div><br></=
div><div>Slick looks like a really nice alternative to anorm for processing=
 resultsets from hand-written SQL, but its ORM syntax looks more obtrusive =
than Squeryl's IMHO. Also it won't be available in your Play applications u=
nless you're using 2.1-SNAPSHOT.</div><div><br></div><div>The downside to S=
queryl is that it has no real institutional support, which makes me nervous=
 using it, but the few developers on the project are excellent and very res=
ponsive.</div><div><br></div><div>Erem<br><br>On Thursday, September 20, 20=
12 12:24:09 AM UTC-7, Trung Pham wrote:<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" st=
yle=3D"margin: 0;margin-left: 0.8ex;border-left: 1px #ccc solid;padding-lef=
t: 1ex;">What ORM do you recommend to use with Play2 Scala?<div>Is there an=
ything that is comparable to ActiveRecord/Ruby?</div><div><br></div><div>Th=
anks.</div></blockquote></div>
------=_Part_1001_26233941.1350248673953--

------=_Part_1000_31765949.1350248673951--