Re: Is a Query langauge really necessary in an OODB?

> > In OODBMS, the situation would seem even more biased against query
> > languages. Why do I, as a developer, need an interpreted query
> > language, when I can simply iterate through a collection? If I need
> > scripting capability, I can always implement part of the solution in
> > Java. What would a query language be except an unneccessary
> > intermediary?
> > --
> > Brian L. Price
 

> One of the nicer benefits of a query language is that 3rd party tools
> can be used.
> For example, report writers like Crystal Reports.
> If each OO application has it's own collection and accessor protocols,
> then it is probably harder to use such a generic tool.
> Just sompin' to think about, -tmind-
>

I know (from other posts/threads) you don't have much use for OO, but an overriding principle of good OO design is: Object shall implement their own behavior. The current crop of tools have it backwards. Rather than the report generator using some method (SQL) to reach inside my object (record), my object should create and pass a view of itself to the report generator (which is responsible for layout). Thus the 'generic' capability is not dependent upon a standard method (SQL) of violating encapsulation.

--
Brian Price

Have compiler will travel.


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.