Re: C# 3.0 with pseudorelational extensions

BobTheDataBaseBoy wrote:
> >
> > I have no idea whether DLinq is well-executed or not. But I'm
> > convinced that unifying the capabilities of the dbms and the
> > general purpose programming language will lead to some great
> > things.
> >
> prolog appeared within months of RM, and was based on just that premise.
> it hasn't taken the world by storm in the decades since.

I dunno. Prolog is still alive and kicking 30 years after its debut, and that's more than most programming languages can say. But Prolog's not really what I have in mind. It's decidedly single-paradigm, for one thing.

> > I also agree that O/R mapping, as it is commonly practiced, is
> > mostly about throwing out relational functionality and putting
> > an OO face on what's left behind. And I'm convinced that this
> > is *not* a useful approach.
>
> it's an idea made be people who don't know how computers actually work.

Well, that's a bit stronger than I'm comfortable with. It's generally the work of people who understand OO just fine, but don't understand relational all that well.

Marshall Received on Sat Sep 17 2005 - 22:33:41 CEST