No.
The fundamental definition of an ORM I found is to hold data model inside an object system which is made persistent with a DB server.
That means mapping in one direction and the "data language" is limited to the semantics of the OOP model.
But that's a one way street.
Like with "Active Record".
> I thought several ORM frameworks are capable of that?
That would surprise me.
Cheers Rolf
(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)
Wikisyntax for the Monastery
In reply to Re^3: Terminology: Is DBIx::Class an ORM?
by LanX
in thread Terminology: Is DBIx::Class an ORM?
by LanX
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |