Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rethinking Database Programming

acadia.engineering

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 167 posts

Re: Rethinking Database Programming

#31

Post by mkehrt »

schaefer wrote: post #23
raumgeist wrote: post #9

Looks very nice. Last year I took up rust, coming from c++, and some of the modern features rust brings are just so nice to have (even something as simple as not having to forward declare a class). This year I started working with postgres and you just can't help but notice how sql is coming from the c-Era of programming. Having better and more modern ways to express my queries would be great to improve correctness a…

> …can't help but notice how sql is coming from the c-Era of programming. Having … more modern ways to express my queries would be great to improve correctness … SQL is based in pure mathematics: set theory, relational algebra. The process of applying mathematical rigor to your database design to prove correctness is referred to as normalization. I don’t mind criticisms like “It’s old, yuck”, but criticisms like “it’…

This isn’t talking about correctness of SQL. It’s talking about correctness of queries.

Re: Rethinking Database Programming

#32

Post by ModernMech »

happyraul wrote: post #24
gbjcantab wrote: post #18

This looks reasonably interesting, and Evan is extremely thoughtful about design; I know he’s put a huge amount of work into this. Personally, I’d be very cautious about adopting closed-source software with such a restrictive license as part of an application, especially given the context of Elm’s trajectory. When Elm went through breaking changes or regressions, or was not worked on publicly for years, users had acc…

On the other hand, with Elm there was no correlation between adoption and funding for development. With Acadia, he's trying a different funding model, so that might mean better support for both Acadia and Elm.

The Elm project forked into a bunch of different Elms because Evan basically abandoned / killed it. Then he got more interested with this project. What’s to say that won’t happen again?

Re: Rethinking Database Programming

#34

Post by weego »

LandR wrote: post #30
happyraul wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the homepage https://acadia.engineering/ : | Not an Object-Relational Mapping (ORM).

I dont see how this isn't just an ORM (like Entity Framework in dot net land).

it might semantically not be an ORM because of something at an engineering level, but it's 100% ORM like from a user point of view, so it's an ORM.

Re: Rethinking Database Programming

#35

Post by happyraul »

ModernMech wrote: post #32
happyraul wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, with Elm there was no correlation between adoption and funding for development. With Acadia, he's trying a different funding model, so that might mean better support for both Acadia and Elm.

The Elm project forked into a bunch of different Elms because Evan basically abandoned / killed it. Then he got more interested with this project. What’s to say that won’t happen again?

I think it's fair to say there are other ways to interpret what happened with Elm. What if Evan stopped working on it because he needed to make a living and working on Elm wasn't going to achieve that? In that case, if working on Acadia will earn him a a living, it seems reasonable to believe he will keep working on it.

Re: Rethinking Database Programming

#36

Post by dminik »

schaefer wrote: post #23
raumgeist wrote: post #9

Looks very nice. Last year I took up rust, coming from c++, and some of the modern features rust brings are just so nice to have (even something as simple as not having to forward declare a class). This year I started working with postgres and you just can't help but notice how sql is coming from the c-Era of programming. Having better and more modern ways to express my queries would be great to improve correctness a…

> …can't help but notice how sql is coming from the c-Era of programming. Having … more modern ways to express my queries would be great to improve correctness … SQL is based in pure mathematics: set theory, relational algebra. The process of applying mathematical rigor to your database design to prove correctness is referred to as normalization. I don’t mind criticisms like “It’s old, yuck”, but criticisms like “it’…

Syntax aside, programmers and mathematicians have a very different view on how things should be done.

Programmers look at data and see opportunities for running a pipeline of transformations (map/filter/...). And they tend to write their SQL like this as well. Or use something like Linq or one of the various pipe syntax SQL extensions.

I would say that this is a major reason why there is this sentiment of "SQL is yucky" by developers. The mental models just don't match.

Re: Rethinking Database Programming

#37

Post by ModernMech »

happyraul wrote: post #35
ModernMech wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Elm project forked into a bunch of different Elms because Evan basically abandoned / killed it. Then he got more interested with this project. What’s to say that won’t happen again?

I think it's fair to say there are other ways to interpret what happened with Elm. What if Evan stopped working on it because he needed to make a living and working on Elm wasn't going to achieve that? In that case, if working on Acadia will earn him a a living, it seems reasonable to believe he will keep working on it.

That is fair but I think that there’s not a clear thing from Evan we can point to which explains it contributes to the uncertainty in this new project. Makes me feel we should be wary of a repeat. If anything it seems what he learned from his experience with Elm is that the project should not have been open, and his main problem seemed to be community relations. Evan’s reputation precedes him so I’m sure Acadia will be a brilliant technical artifact, but I wouldn’t get burned twice trying to be a member of that community or contributing to it technically.

Re: Rethinking Database Programming

#39

Post by Izkata »

LandR wrote: post #30
happyraul wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the homepage https://acadia.engineering/ : | Not an Object-Relational Mapping (ORM).

I dont see how this isn't just an ORM (like Entity Framework in dot net land).

Yeah, from the post it might even be more limited than Django (python) ever was. For example it allows the user to define its own fields, which was used over a decade ago in libraries to extend Django and provide json support long before it was officially supported.

Re: Rethinking Database Programming

#40

Post by dwohnitmok »

Oh man. If this lobste.rs comment is correct about the subscription terms then this feels like a really hard pill to swallow: https://lobste.rs/s/ykq7ym/rethinking_database_programming#c...

Still might be viable, but would be tricky to sell.

> SUBSCRIPTION TERMS

> This license is subscription-based and will remain valid only for the duration of your active subscription. Upon expiration or termination of your subscription:

> a) Your rights to use the Software will cease; b) You must uninstall and stop using the Software; and c) You may lose access to any data or content created with or stored in the Software.

Post reply on HN