[Seaside] Database Integration
martin.schubert at informatik.uni-ulm.de
Thu Jun 1 16:53:50 UTC 2006
i agree. i played a little bit with the Magma database which has a
nice integration abillity with seaside. have a look at swiki to get
but the sophistication and (DOCUMENTATION!!!) that for example the
OODB db4o brings for java (especially Web Apps) isn`t reached by far.
i see that most people who are developing these amazing extensions
and applications with and for squeak see only few pennies (or none at
all) for the work they do. but without proper and a kind of more
recent documentation newbies get interested but won`t stay because
they get lost too easily. thats why i turned backed to java (jsf)
several times. at the moment i only consider to hold any kind of data
in the image itself.
an improvement on the navigational structure and organization of
documentation on swiki could do wonders.
any thoughts? a bit off topic : i am sorry for that. ...
Am 01.06.2006 um 18:31 schrieb Dan Shafer:
> Before I returned to my Smalltalk roots, I took a side trip into
> Ruby on Rails. I never got very good at it (I think maybe I'm too
> old to learn such fancy new tricks) but I did understand it
> conceptually and admired it. Seaside seems, in some ways, to be an
> improvement even on the wildly popular Rails. Except for one thing.
> One of the main things Rails does for you as a developer is
> completely abstract out the necessity of dealing with the database.
> And since most Web apps -- at least the ones I'm planning to build
> -- have databases behind them for one reason or another, this is
> kind of important. As far as I can tell, at least, Seaside leaves
> the issue unaddressed. Is that because Smalltalk apps are less
> likely to *use* databases or because of capabilities built into
> Squeak/Smalltalk that can be taken advantage of without having to
> put more code into Seaside or is it in the planning stages or what?
> Seaside mailing list
> Seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
More information about the Seaside