Re: OO and relation "impedance mismatch"
Date: Fri, 15 Oct 2004 14:29:00 -0400
Message-ID: <5qadnW5UX_5ni-3cRVn-pA_at_comcast.com>
"Bernard Peek" <bap_at_shrdlu.com> wrote in message
news:RV4eU7bFGAcBFwcf_at_shrdlu.com...
> In message <iz%7d.409134$8_6.338269_at_attbi_s04>, Marshall Spight
> <mspight_at_dnai.com> writes
>
>
> >Limiting classes to only be applicable to relational domains would be
> >hamstringing them.
>
> I've been thinking about this impedance mismatch for a while. One of the
> things that I think contributes is the assumption that classes are
> prescriptive rather than descriptive. That's a given if you approach the
> problem using the existing OO languages that I'm aware of. The impedance
> mismatch seems to be between OO languages and OO data storage systems.
>
> I'm visualising a system where a piece of code might be something like:
>
> CREATE CLASS REDTHINGS AS SELECT COLOUR = "RED"
>
> Thus classes would all be created dynamically as sets of objects meeting
> a selection criterion.
One of the things that I'm perplexed about is why the people who think about this impedance mismatch focus so much on the "class".