Re: [ANN] Moe - a simple database persistency framework and a few other things

On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 2:15 PM, stéphane ducasse <ducasse(a)iam.unibe.ch Disadvantages: The persisted objects must be subclasses of MOEmbeddedObject that is one downside. John why? May be just a trait would be nice since you could plug your layer in any domain objects. I was just planning to do a stupid traits to save magritte described object in XML. I was planning to do the same with SandStone: turning the root class in a trait and get free from framework tyranny. I have never looked into Traits I am still fairly new to Smalltalk. One can only digest so many frameworks in a day :)

But really I was just working with Magritte to get a more intimate understanding of it. Saw that Magritte-Roe gives us very easy connectivity to PostgreSQL whilst keeping all that other Magritte meta-description goodness and I just extended it a little to suit what I saw as a need. I will put Traits on my "to look into" list. Cheers John Also you cannot recursively embed objects. This kind of thing can be insidious so you have to be careful with what you describe as an embedded object/collection. Moe is only meant to make the db mirror your application data. Redundant storage only. It's very simple. Advantages: Its *very* simple :) 3) Is this project similar to SqueakSave? http://www.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/hirschfeld/projects/sqsave/index.html No way. That looks pretty awesome, though. I have to check it out.. ps: if you have to user another database instead of postgres, you know there is SqueakDBX ;) BTW it could use a few more tests :) _______________________________________________ Magritte, Pier and Related Tools ... https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/smallwiki -- http://jmck.seasidehosting.st _______________________________________________ Magritte, Pier and Related Tools ... https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/smallwiki