[monero-xmr]

Any ORM provides the same features for any SQL database. There is nothing special going on here. If perhaps the database autogenerated a bunch of classes, maybe that’s interesting? I think some projects have introspected a database and created all the boilerplate language classes before.

There is nothing magical about wrapping database objects in language classes. This has been happening forever.

https://docs.sqlalchemy.org/en/20/orm/quickstart.html#select...

Nothing magical about using a function call rather than raw SQL.

[esafak]

No, it does not. Furthermore, if you're using an ORM you're not programming in SQL any more. You're using a poor man's Spark. Spark lets you drop down to SQL in all its APIs too.

I don't understand your argument if you're comfortable with ORMs.

[monero-xmr]

I’m not even sure what we are debating. Spark is for big data work, it isn’t something you would typically use as a general purpose database backing your application. My original point way back is that expecting customers to learn an entirely new paradigm for storing and querying data is a poor decision, and limits your work to niche use cases. Spark has a large niche but it isn’t comparable to MySQL / Postgres or other newish data stores like Dynamo.

Furthermore any competent engineer knows SQL because ORMs are cumbersome and annoying for anything except basic use.