[std.database] ORM

[bls]

Am 13.10.2011 20:16, schrieb simendsjo:
> On 13.10.2011 19:49, bls wrote:
>> Am 13.10.2011 18:44, schrieb simendsjo:
>>> On 13.10.2011 11:53, Steve Teale wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 13 Oct 2011 11:22:20 +0200, bls wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> > Am 12.10.2011 20:13, schrieb Steve Teale:
>>>>>> >> The way this discussion is going we're going to have four layers,
>>>>>> with
>>>>>> >> the top one written by Jacob.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > 1 = etc.c.
>>>>> > 2 = Database classes
>>>>> > 3 = ??
>>>>> > 4 = ORM
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Please explain ?
>>>> What I meant was that there might be a layer here that would provide a
>>>> common interface to the supported databases in terms of literal SQL
>>>> commands, as embodied in Andrei's example
>>>>
>>>
>>> I was thinking more like
>>> 1) etc.c.mysql/pg - c interface
>>> 2) std.sql.mysql/pg - d interface using templates, ranges etc
>>> 3) Database classes - common interface
>>> 4) ORM
>>
>> Sorry, I don't get it. IMHO 2) and 3) are at the same level.. F.I.
>> a draft :
>>
>> http://pastebin.com/n8H0QF8X
>>
>
> 2) doesn't hide any features of the database. If the database supports a
> feature, it's here.
> 3) is a common interface - will hide the specific database, including
> features unique for this db.
>
> At any level, you should be able to drop down to the lower levels if
> necessary.
>
> Of course... 4) could be built directly on 1), 2) or 3). Step 2) isn't
> really needed as long as you can get internal handles and drop down to
> 1), but having a clean D interface instead would be nice.

Thanks for the feedback.. I am still not there :)
from the snippet..

final class MySQL : IDatabase {
         // common _Interface implementation stuff_
         public void open(string host,string db,string user,string pw,
                 const string[string] params) {

         }
         public void open(string host,string db,string user,string pw) {
         }
         // _MySQL specific_
         public void funkyMySQLstuff() {}
}

what keeps you away to use .. auto db = new MySQL() ?? the MySQL class 
can be as close to the metal as you want it to be ?

well, guess we have to wait for the first stuff from Steve. It is just 
that I think : design first,  implement later.