Content deleted Content added
Line 98:
"But in general, the pros outweigh the cons when using this paradigm." This statement is a judgment by the author. Pros and cons should be listed, but it's up to the reader to decide whether the pros outweigh cons. <span style="font-size: smaller;" class="autosigned">—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/150.228.40.142|150.228.40.142]] ([[User talk:150.228.40.142|talk]]) 18:34, 9 April 2009 (UTC)</span><!-- Template:UnsignedIP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
I agree that Wikipedia shouldn't have bald opinions of individual authors. That said, there's a lot of potential encyclopedic content around referring to standard critiques and defenses of ORM. I'll say this non-neutrally on the talk page: having worked for years with ORM tools, I find that they make an easy problem even easier (tedious code to map columns to fields), but then add their own problems that are often really hard and time-consuming to solve (loss of control around locking, reading way more data than you need before making a small edit, reading back data after a save that you usually just throw away anyway, way more complex update commands than if you wrote the SQL by hand), plus the experience of pervasive mystery about what your program is doing. That's on the critique side. I am sure it depends on context, though, and that there are people with good experiences that could provide a defense of these tools. For example, some databases are just used by a single user at a time, in which case a lot of the cons won't really be an issue. [[User:Lexspoon|Lexspoon]] ([[User talk:Lexspoon|talk]]) 14:16, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
== New Proposed Article ==
| |||