Look at that. The very fucking smart colleague spent 40 days implementing a repository pattern (WHEN WE'RE USING AN ACTIVE RECORD ORM), breaking stuff left and right. Does he use that fucking pattern at the very least?

Of course he doesn't. And along the way he's making sure to create conflicts with the stuff he broke (and I'm fixing). By the time I fix the merge conflicts of one commit, he pushed 6 of them.

High IQ programming

Active Record....

Eeeeeeeewewwwwwwwwwewwww.

A lot of pus, pimples and slow pokes.

I hate him already 😊

If you don't mind explaining, what problems does it cause? I've never heard of an active record ORM but Google says it's data stored in memory

@Crost

Active Record - an object representating a single row of a database

Repository pattern - you shift from a row centric view to usually a table centric view

@IntrusionCM even with EF you get a single record put and represent it with an object. But I guess the ORM itself represents single records then.

Thanks

@Crost EF?

@IntrusionCM entity framework. Sorry sometimes I forget the world is not .net xD

@Crost Yes and no.

An active record ORM is usually fixed on representing a single object as a row.

If you want to e.g. bulk update, the active record object would load, modify, store, reload each object - it's an row focused paradigm.

An entity framework (I'm sure that you mean MS entity framework which fits this too, but I mean entity framework in general) isn't fixed to one paradigm.

You can usually mix several patterns in an entity framework.

An active record ORM is by some considered an anti-pattern....