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

From: topmind <>
Date: 2000/04/01
Message-ID: <>#1/1

In article <>, Jim McKay <> wrote:
>> 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
>> their own behavior. The current crop of tools have it
>> Rather than the report generator using some method (SQL) to
>> inside my object (record),
>An SQL call is not reaching 'inside your object (record)', it's
 making a call
>to (usually) the DB engine. This is not anti OOP.

Are you sure you want to open the messy door about what "OO" is and is not? (The definition seems to be a continuum IMO. IOW, it is not all-or-nothing. For example, many agree that Smalltalk is "more OO" than Java.)

>> 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


Received on Sat Apr 01 2000 - 00:00:00 CEST

Original text of this message