Object-Relation Mapping without the Container
Justin Powell writes "If you follow the latest developer buzz then you've likely heard of IOC (Inversion of Control) containers and AOP (aspect-oriented programming). Like many developers, however, you may not see where these technologies fit into your development efforts. Learn where they can fit with a hands-on introduction to using Hibernate and Spring to build a transactional persistence tier for your enterprise applications."
After all, Java development environments are well known for thier conciseness and simple nature. Let's throw another couple of tools into the works....
And if you thought that was boring you obviously havn't read my Journal ;-)
Is AOP (Aspect-Oriented Programming) simply evidence that OO (Object-Orientation) has some fundamental design problems?
Unlike EJB CMP CMR and like JDO, Hibernate can work inside of or outside of a J2EE container, which is a boon for those of us doing TDD and agile development.
Acronym hell. Java used to be pretty easy to understand. There was Swing, there was AWT, there was the language and the development environment was concise. Not all of it was good, but I knew where I stood. Right now I know that 4 of those 6 acronyms aren't relevant to my work as a programmer. And none of them relate to Java as a language. People talk about ATL, STL, MFC and whatnot, but C++ the language has endured as a language independent of its modules. Love it or hate it, it's a language that deserves respect for this endurance. Right now I can't say that for Java. Whatever happened to plain Java?
Maybe I'm just not getting it, but me "getting it" is what's the deciding factor in my choice of tools, since I have to get it to do my work. I get .NET; there's the language (C#,VB,C++,WinForms, all .NET) and there's the tool (Visual Studio, maybe Mono). I know for a fact I can write code using VS that can compile on linux with the minimum of modification. I also know which modules lock me to windows (VB.NET, Winforms) and which ones don't (maybe C# if Mono succeeds, Strict C++ saves the day for portability). I learnt this from documentation, research and testing by my own hand. I've researched Java, kept informed of it, but all I see now is a concoction of marketing hype and a bad case of constant scope creep. Another quote:
The starting point is an enterprise application for which you are implementing a transactional persistence layer.
Overkill! I'm sorry, my customers aren't going to spend the money buying our software when they need to install an entirely new infrastructure to support it. The margins aren't that high in my industry. Besides, why do I need yet another framework? What was wrong with the old one? If the old one was so bad it had to be replaced, why promote it in the first place? I don't care about an implementation of the newest development methodology. I care about development cost, infrastructure, what customers will put up with, and what I can support without costing me a fortune in time, effort and understanding.
This article showed me nothing that gives me any clue to how useful this is really going to be "in the field". I think I'll just go hibernate until Java springs into action...
click-clack, front and back. I'm not moving this car otherwise.
CA/Fujitsu abandoned their Jasmine OO database product, and it looks like Progress is allowing ObjectStore to wither on the vine.
Oh, AND WE NEED 64-BIT DATABASES AND 64-BIT PROGRAMMING LANGUAGES LIKE YESTERDAY!!! SQL's 32-bit BLOB just doesn't cut the mustard. Hell, the following won't even compile on Java 1.5:
} Any advice as to 64-bit object-oriented databases would be MOST appreciated.Thanks!