Re: relational tables and objects

> Ok. But would I then not also have to override/reimplement the relational
> operators (like GROUP BY or JOIN) to take the specific implementation into
> account?

No, operators work at the level where the implementation is not known.  In fact you could easily join an in-memory table with another one, located on a disk.

> Axioms usually don't have empirical evidence. :-) But your argument works of
> course in both ways. Why would I use this library if I can use RDBMSs
[Quoted] > without the need of filling in templates or defining derived classes?

1. because you do not always want the overhead of the RDBMS, and
2. because in C++ you may want to benefit from the type safety, and
3. because no RDBMS allows (to the best of my knowledge) to hold C++ objects of any type including pointers, functors, coordinates, etc.

And by the way, you don't need to define derived classes (at least directly), do you?

Arkadiy Received on Fri Nov 01 2002 - 04:34:06 CET