Softmind Technology wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> Comparing Active Record VS DataMapper...?
> 
> Can any one provide more details on this..
> 
> Any Links of Blogs comparing the above two.
> 
> I shall also welcome your suggestions on this.
> 
> Thanks

I was curious about this myself, I have used AR for years now and I was 
interested in DM's promise of no migrations and optional lazy loading of 
fields.  I have no problem expressing my fields in the models (I 
actually like it) and I have no problem being committed to MySQL. If DM 
can update your schema automagically when seeing an 
incompatibility/update with your model then I won't sleep for a week due 
to the magic of it all.

I used to think that migrations were the best thing since sliced bread 
but due to the fact that AR attempts to cater to every major vendor, I 
usually  have to go in a hand tune my migrations anyways (bigint and 
foreign key constraints which I realize many feel are unnecessary when 
working with RoR).  I also used to follow OG as well but after some 
playing around, i came to the conclusion that updating the schema with 
it was far more difficult than it was with AR.

Merb right now is a big carrot for me and it has direct support (through 
gem dloads) for haml AND DataMapper so I think something truly great (or 
at least very exciting) is in the mix!  Due to the fact that I am a 
coward however, I still use AR at work as I am very comfortable with it 
and I finally got used to a lot of it's black magic through 
method_missing craziness.

Merb/DataMapper is a cinch to dload and set up so you should see it for 
yourself..
ilan



-- 
Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.