Hacker News Reader

Comment by folmar | Hacker News Reader

> (1) that it's unstructured, so getting data into or out of SQL involves strings

Structured types are in SQL since 1999.

Also, all languages I used support parametrized queries so you do not have to mix data and query strings. Not converting data to strings is not an argument for ORMs, it's an argument for parametrized queries.

People should really look into JOOQ to see what a SQL friendly ORM looks like.

Another vote for jOOQ, it's just so good. You can really see it's made by a true SQL fan.

> Also, all languages I used support parametrized queries so you do not have to mix data and query strings. Not converting data to strings is not an argument for ORMs, it's an argument for parametrized queries.

Your "parameterized" queries are still serialized strings. Many language bindings for SQL interfaces don't have good support for serializing data types, so you will often see things like ?::datetime in the template string. Some don't have the ability to parameterize column names (or have subtle bugs) either.

> People should really look into JOOQ to see what a SQL friendly ORM looks like.

I've never heard of JOOQ. Do you know of a good introduction?

> Your "parameterized" queries are still serialized strings. Many language bindings for SQL interfaces don't have good support for serializing data types, so you will often see things like ?::datetime in the template string.

How else would you do it, short of a binary query format?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com