Re: For your review: Laszlo Database API spec version 1.1
Geert Bevin <gbevin <at> uwyn.com>
2005-11-03 08:23:30 GMT
Hi Max,
I follow Henry on this, as I said before in my previous comments.
I think that you should settle on a language that allows people to
provide model datasets and method signatures. The implementation of
these methods should be totally up to the server-side and I still
don't any need to add SQL to the mix. The same goes for callbacks.
I still think that you should make the relationship mappings just one
of the many possible constraints. A lot of others can be useful and
they will be totally application dependent.
I also miss constraints on fields (notNull, notEmpty, maxLength,
minLength, ...). For example, here is the list of constraints we
currently support in RIFE:
http://rifers.org/docs/api/com/uwyn/rife/site/ConstrainedProperty.html
http://rifers.org/docs/api/com/uwyn/rife/cmf/CmfProperty.html
http://rifers.org/docs/api/com/uwyn/rife/site/ConstrainedBean.html
I understand you base it on ActiveRecord, but why, and why
specifically the Rails alternative? Wouldn't is be much more useful
to have a more generic approach?
Best regards,
Geert
On 3-nov-05, at 02:28, Henry Minsky wrote:
> I'm a little unclear on how things are divided up to build an app.
> When you declare a model, that gets compiled on the *server* into a
> a database schema and a handler that accepts incoming URLs which
> contain those path-like commands, right?
>
> On the client, there is some protocol that can deserialize the
> results of commands and turn them into .. .what? datasets?
>
> One thing I am concerned about is what is the mechanism where the
> user can override or extend the SQL that is automatically
> compiled, and directly right their own "command handlers" (I'm not
> sure what to call this) on the server?
>
> In my experience, each particular brand of database you choose for
> the back end will have many of its own quirks or unique non
> standard features, which you will often want to take advantage of,
> so it would be important to be able to manually write your own
> "methods", and particulary in the case where you do complex
> transactions than involve touching a lot of tables, or that involve
> calling stored procedures in some complex way...
>
>
> On 11/2/05, Max Carlson <max <at> laszlosystems.com> wrote: Hi,
>
> I'd like your feedback on the attached revised spec. Thanks to
> everyone
> who has provided feedback so far - I've incorporated a lot of it, and
> revision tracking is on so you should be able to easily see the parts
> that changed. Let me know how it looks. Once again, I look
> forward to
> hearing your thoughts and feedback!
>
> Regards,
> Max Carlson
> OpenLaszlo
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Laszlo-dev mailing list
> Laszlo-dev <at> openlaszlo.org
> http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Henry Minsky
> Software Architect
> hminsky <at> laszlosystems.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Laszlo-dev mailing list
> Laszlo-dev <at> openlaszlo.org
> http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev
--
Geert Bevin Uwyn bvba
"Use what you need" Avenue de Scailmont 34
http://www.uwyn.com 7170 Manage, Belgium
gbevin[remove] at uwyn dot com Tel +32 64 84 80 03
PGP Fingerprint : 4E21 6399 CD9E A384 6619 719A C8F4 D40D 309F D6A9
Public PGP key : available at servers pgp.mit.edu, wwwkeys.pgp.net