Re: Date's First Great Blunder
Date: 14 Apr 2004 06:27:41 -0700
"Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com> wrote in message news:<c5ia56$t04$1_at_news.netins.net>...
> He suggests that there are two answers given: domain = object class or
> relvar = object class. He then says that the first equation is obviously
> right and the second wrong. Classes are types and domains are types, but
> relvars are variables and, therefore, not types, so QED.
It's all very obvious.
> The idea, it seems, is to rid Java programmers of the notion of using
> classes to define "relations" or records.
The idea is to rid programmers of making great blunders.
> I'm guessing I'm not the only one
> who doesn't buy Mr. Date's argument.
The vast majority of the OO coders reject the evident when it is
against the dogma.
> topic. How about this equation:
> Class = Metadata
> A class is a spec/template -- not a variable nor an object. There can be
> metadata for a type and metadata for a relation/record and classes
> corresponding to either.
> Do many folks agree with Date on this point or is this one of his
> lone-ranger attempts to push against the OO folks?
This is an attempt to educate the misleaded and misinformed practicioners.
Alfredo Received on Wed Apr 14 2004 - 15:27:41 CEST