[Ironruby-core] General advice

Mike Moore blowmage at gmail.com
Fri Jan 4 16:12:07 EST 2008


Hi Ivan, I have some thoughts.  I know I've been away from this list a
while, sorry about that.

On Jan 4, 2008 12:07 PM, Ivan Porto Carrero <ivan at flanders.co.nz> wrote:

> Hi
>
> For the book I'm writing on IronRuby I'm deciding which way to go to
> demonstrate how IronRuby can leverage the .NET framework.
>
> The beginning of the sample application should implement some database
> layer. My first instinct is to go with Linq-to-SQL and consume those classes
> from a ruby application.


Ultimately, we should be able to call any .NET lib from IronRuby.  So to an
extent I don't think it matters what your pre-existing data access layer is
written in, as long as it is valid .NET code.

That said, if I were buying a book on IronRuby, I would want to know how
Ruby approaches data access.  I already know ADO.NET, and possibly the
various.NET-based ORM frameworks.  What I probably don't know are the Ruby
libraries like DBI.


> I have a problem with ActiveRecord that comes with Rails, because often it
> doesn't allow me to the things I want to do out of the box. And when I'm in
> App Dev mode I don't really want to think about customizing the framework
> I'm using so that it fits my needs. I should just have to configure it and
> start developing. For this reason I don't consider ActiveRecord to be
> sufficient for most enterprise database systems and definitely not legacy
> ones. I don't think it would be a good idea to let .NET devs jump to an ORM
> that won't handle the more complex enterprise scenario's out of the box.


Regardless whether you consider ActiveRecord sufficient, alot of developers
will want to know how to use ActiveRecord from IronRuby.  I think you are
missing an great opportunity if AR isn't covered, along with what changes
might be needed to get it to work with IronRuby.

Besides, there are always the other ORM libraries that you can cover which
may be a closer to what you think a good ORM should be:

DataMapper - http://datamapper.org/
Sequel - http://sequel.rubyforge.org/
rBatis - http://ibatis.apache.org/docs/ruby/


> I'm thinking of writing a real ORM for Ruby ala NHibernate one that uses a
> DataMapper with an IdentityMap backed by a Unit Of Work, when I'm finished
> with the book. It should also have  Sql Generation that is highly optimized
> for each platform it supports (not just say because mssql is from ms we
> won't provide the best support for it we can) and maybe make it support
> linq-to-sql syntax. Obviously I can't build that in 2 days so I'll have to
> drop that idea for a while ;)
>
> A second option I have in mind is rolling my own implementation of the
> ActiveRecord pattern, using database reflection, an ADO.NET backend and
> metaprogramming since it has a very limited scope for the book. I'm always
> much in favor for a unit of work implementation for my dataaccess.
>
> At this moment I'm favoring the Linq-to-Sql (C#) approach because it has
> benefits :
> 1. I demonstrate interop with one of my own project assemblies and how you
> can extend that using IronRuby.
> 2. I don't have to write my own ORM
> 3. I won't be stopped in my writing by features that haven't been
> implemented yet.
>
> The downside of that approach is that it will be hard to show an example
> that makes real extensive use of metaprogramming.
> A second concern I have for the Linq-to-SQL approach is that that will
> only work on a windows box, because I don't think the mono-project has an
> implementation already.
>
> Then a last way of doing it would be to use ActiveRecord from the castle
> project or SubSonic where the ActiveRecord implementation of the
> CastleProject will be the one that handles most edge cases. The reason I
> bring these 2 up is that I already got questions from people asking me to
> put examples up on my blog about using those things  from IronRuby. At this
> point I haven't put too much on my blog yet because I'm pretty busy writing.
> And I think every week I wait I'm more close to being able to use as much
> pure ruby as I can.
>
> Any thoughts ?
>

If it were me, I'd avoid anything that required readers to use any language
other than IronRuby.  Good luck!


> Cheers
> Ivan
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ironruby-core mailing list
> Ironruby-core at rubyforge.org
> http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/ironruby-core
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://rubyforge.org/pipermail/ironruby-core/attachments/20080104/26aa0f82/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the Ironruby-core mailing list