|
|
Ruby on Rails: Talk |
One idea - with another ORM wrapper (Alzabo - www.alzabo.org) I used You'll from me again, most likely . . . -DJCP -- Bryan Evans wrote: Awesome. I work for a company where the philosophy is that you build a
> The main difference is that the implementation of DrySQL makes ORM truly
> DRY. Everything is generated based on your DB's information schema, so
> you are not constrained in any way by naming conventions (i.e. foreign
> key names, primary key names, table names, etc).
good database schema first - designed so that it can outlive whatever
app server you use to create interfaces. Spoiled by PostgreSQL, I
suppose. No matter what, we're going to enforce constraints and
relations in the database - so to have a layer that'll keep us from
having to repeat ourselves in model definitions would be perfect.
PostgreSQL comment fields to specify more advanced field attributes. The
idea of using comments in your database to specify more detailed column
information makes a lot of sense to me.
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.