Object Relational Mappers are evil (a meditation)

[J Kenneth King]

r0g <aioe.org at technicalbloke.com> writes:

> J Kenneth King wrote:
>> Steven D'Aprano <steve at REMOVE-THIS-cybersource.com.au> writes:
>> 
>>> On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 19:20:21 -0500, Steve Holden wrote:
>>>
> <snip>
>
>>>> Hear, hear!
>>> That's all very well, but some languages and techniques encourage the 
>>> programmer to write bad code.
>> 
>> That's just BS.
>> 
>> Bad code doesn't just write itself.  Programmers write bad code.  And
>> ignorance is not an excuse.
>> 
>> Just because a language allows a programmer to write sloppy code doesn't
>> put the language at fault for the bad code programmers write with it.
>
>
>
> Okay, as long as you realize the corollary of your argument is:
>
> It is impossible for a language to encourage programmers to write good
> code and promote good programming practices by design.
>
> I'm not sure that's entirely true either.
>
> I think python's "one way to do something" design philosophy goes some
> way toward that, as does Smalltalk's enforced message passing. I think
> PHP's superglobals and namespacing encourage bad practices (or used to
> back in the day), as do Basic's GOTO and Ecmascript's prototype
> overriding.

I think your corollary is slightly misleading.

It would be more apt to say, "Just because a language allows a
programmer to write good code doesn't mean that the language is
responsible for the good code programmers write with it."

It is the responsibility of the programmer to recognize the advantages
and flaws of their tools.  PHP doesn't encourage a programmer to be a
bad programmer because it lacks name-spaces or because BASIC has GOTO
statements.  A bad programmer will be a bad programmer because they
don't understand what makes these features distinct, useful, or
damaging.

The language doesn't encourage anything.  It's just a medium like oil
paints and canvas.  A painting can be good or bad despite the medium it
is constructed on.  The skill of the painter is what matters.

>
> Surely a language CAN be said to encourage kludges and sloppiness if it
> allows a good way and a bad way and makes the bad way much easier to
> implement or understand for noobs.
>
> Roger.

The programmer can be encouraged to use kludges and produce sloppy
code.  Whether by ignorance or inflated ego.  Languages with more choice
just give them more rope to hang themselves with.