Re: object relational database versus "inteligent" serialization

On 2/7/2010 5:37 AM, luc peuvrier wrote:


You never answered the questions and comments from people the last time
you spammed for this project.

Except to write me privately and deny that you're a spammer, something
to which this latest post gives the lie.

Oh, you responded, but your responses didn't address the points. For
example, Arved Sandstrom that "persistence providers like EclipseLink
have put a lot of effort into doing 'intelligent' serialization as
described above." You answered that "[t]he joafip goal was to write a
full object data model without take care of memory amount, the object
graph is derecitly backend to file." How does that address the point
that your product doesn't add value compared to, say, EclipseLink? I
don't even understand what you were trying to say there, much less how
it distinguishes your project.

Tom Anderson challenged you to show how your project differs from JDO,
the failed predecessor to JPA. You threw the ball back in his court,
"I will be happy you compare the JOAFIP and JDO facade." When I pointed
out that it's your job to make the comparison for us, your only response
was to (falsely) deny that you're a spammer. You completely ducked
tom's point. What's the matter, afraid your project will suffer for the
comparison?

There is nothing in any description of your project that shows it to
have any advantage whatsoever over any other object-storage or
object-relational-mapping framework. Maybe because your project isn't
offering any such advantage? I'm willing to accept that it might, but
your refusal to delineate any is rather telling, I'm afraid.

Now you're back again, starting an entirely new thread on the exact same
topic, and somehow I suspect you will once again refuse to engage
directly in the challenge of showing why we should pay any attention
whatsoever.

You can change that impression and prove me wrong, of course. That is,
if you have anything substantive to say.

--
Lew