Link Details

The article title is a sly way to get people to read a rant on Spring's JDBC template API. The author says "From the examples in the documentation I looked at, it seemed simple enough, but that was only because it was doing simple things. When I took a look at called Stored Procedures it didn’t look so simple any more." and then goes on to show a useless example to prove his point which proves nothing. Get some more complex stored procedures in place and you can begin to see the usefulness of the API vs doing it directly in JDBC.

I didn't vote it down for the rant. Everyone can rant. I voted it down for the misleading title.

Gregg: I suppose you may be right about the API, but if that's so, why put a trivial example in the documentation that makes the product seem like such a hindrance? Wouldn't you want an example in the documentation that shows the usefulness of the product?

Not for nothing, but I believe the description I used for the article states that it's a rant about what bugs me about frameworks, and it is, using Spring's template API as an example since it's the latest example I've seen.

"One framework we looked at using instead of creating our own was the Spring framework’s wrapper for JDBC. I don’t want to start a flame war, but honestly, what’s the deal with that monstrosity?"

Exactly my thoughts about the Spring product. Clever Marketing isn't a substitute for usability.

not only was the example trivial, but there was no real insight provided as to the cons. the example provided by spring is meant to instruct new comers with something that looks familiar. in order to leverage the framework, there is further reading required.

rnocera, you've got to look at the documentation again and I think you are missing the boat. I find that I am writing less lines of code but the other thing rob is that is the least of my worries when using the framework, it' usually something to do with the appserver/vendor of choice at the customer.
,