in reply to Architecture of a Database system

I'd suspect that while you list it as a misfeature, the abstractioning away of SQL might have been considered a feature for this developers. Despite SQL's simplicity, someone up the management branch might have decided to avoid introducing a new 'language' to pure perl programmers.

It could also easily be a result of Object Orientied-itis. Such a scheme as you describe EASILY fits itself into someone making a class heirarchy of web sites.

In either case, inexperienced perl programmers or higher-ups non-programmers sound like the root cause.

Dr. Michael K. Neylon - mneylon-pm@masemware.com || "You've left the lens cap of your mind on again, Pinky" - The Brain

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
(dws)Re: Re: Architecture of a Database system
by dws (Chancellor) on Apr 04, 2001 at 21:08 UTC
    It could also easily be a result of Object Orientied-itis.

    It's been my experience that most attempts to build abstraction layers on top of SQL are initiated by the programmers themselves, often for just this reason. They (uh, "we", since I've done this too :-) see SQL as lacking in OO goodness, and want to impose our own abstraction atop it.

    Perhaps this one of of those cases where there's a "I've implemented my own _____ abstraction" club. The existence of such a club would explain a lot of strange code.

[reply]

In Section Seekers of Perl Wisdom