[Rails] Re: Generating SQL from model and not vice versa

[David Heinemeier Hansson]

>> Is it only to avoid switching to a tool specially designed for such 
>> tasks and doing it with a few clicks/
>
> Few clicks?  Hardly.  Either way I have to type the table/class name, 
> field/attribute names, data types, and associations.  No savings on 
> typing either way, but one less conceptual shift if everything is 
> driven by code.

Have you seen the Rails videos? There was a new one just released that 
shows the flow once again. When you make the changes straight on the 
database, you don't have a build phase (generate SQL from model, drop 
database, create new database), which means its change'n'reload to see 
result.

And, as I described in the earlier example, you don't throw out the 
data you've been working on to make a change. Which is the most 
important benefit to me.

But the discussion is no longer an either or. Since I'm going to do the 
migration approach anyway, having the possibility of an in-model schema 
is a fairly trivial addition. And one that'll benefit those who don't 
like to leave their editor while working a system or those who needs 
the benefits of 1 abstract schema => 6 concrete schemas.
--
David Heinemeier Hansson,
http://www.basecamphq.com/   -- Web-based Project Management
http://www.rubyonrails.org/  -- Web-application framework for Ruby
http://www.loudthinking.com/ -- Broadcasting Brain