This comment is spot on. I've seen similar scenarios myself. :)
99% of articles like the above one come down to: "developers wanted to pretend there isn't some underlying data model underneath, and abstracted it away".
The problem isn't that much in ORMs / query builds etc. It's with "Objects" itself, and the idea that one can abstract away the data model and pretend the business code can be written as a bunch of OOP classes and such. It seems like a genius move at the beginning but hits a really steep cliff once the load and complexity of problems incrementally increases. When it starts to happen it's actually funny how not many people can actually realize what happens, and they usually struggle with band-aid solutions and blaming irrelevant pieces.
99% of articles like the above one come down to: "developers wanted to pretend there isn't some underlying data model underneath, and abstracted it away".
The problem isn't that much in ORMs / query builds etc. It's with "Objects" itself, and the idea that one can abstract away the data model and pretend the business code can be written as a bunch of OOP classes and such. It seems like a genius move at the beginning but hits a really steep cliff once the load and complexity of problems incrementally increases. When it starts to happen it's actually funny how not many people can actually realize what happens, and they usually struggle with band-aid solutions and blaming irrelevant pieces.
I decided to post on twitter about it: https://twitter.com/dpc_pw/status/1240719977071575040 in case anyone is interested.