On 12/02/2010 07:22 PM, Tony Arcieri wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 12, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Mike Stephens <rubfor / recitel.net> wrote:
>
>> Databases have a wealth of logic, elegance and functionality. Slapping
>> them in the crude harness of ORMs is a most unfortunate and regressive
>> trend.
>
> On the contrary, ORMs let people utilize this wealth of domain knowledge in
> SQL databases without having to touch the abysmal puddle of vomit that is
> SQL, and using familiar object interfaces through metalinguistic
> abstraction.
>
> ORMs rock, and they're a stepping stone towards a future where distributed
> "NoSQL" data stores will be a satisfactory replacement for the dinosaurs
> that are SQL databases.
>
> That said, I still use MySQL as our only database.
>
SQL isn't necessarily abysmal it just does not lend itself to the kinds
of things application developers need to do in the application layer. 
SQL is very nice as long as you don't try to do things it was not made
for.  Not that SQL as a language is not in need of improvements.  The
way some queries *don't* work like one would expect when you apply a
range is one such thing.