Re: The wisdom of the object mentors (Was: Searching OO Associations with RDBMS Persistence Models)

From: Joe Van Dyk <joe.vandyk_at_boeing.com>
Date: Wed, 31 May 2006 17:23:49 GMT
Message-ID: <J054Bp.1ro_at_news.boeing.com>


Mikito Harakiri wrote:
> Robert Martin wrote:
>

>>Ah, it is so easy to generalize about what one person understands.
>>Are you saying that it is "pure unadulterated garbage" that application
>>developers should isolate their application code from the the whims of
>>the API designers at Oracle?

>
>
> Database API is SQL. Everything else is auxiliary technology that
> supports it. JDBC is merely a low level programmatic glue between SQL
> and Java, PL/SQL (stored procedures) are the way to enhance SQL with
> programmatic relations (aka functions).
>
>
>>Should those application designers use
>>every little cute ORACLE trick and call?

>
>
> Sometimes you have no choice. Consider hierarchical queries, for
> example. Would you go through all the trouble learning/implementing
> nested sets/intervals, materialized path etc, or rather write
> relatively straightforward query based on proprietory "connect by" SQL
> feature?
>
>
>>Or shoudl they stick to
>>standard SQL as proferred by ODBMS or JDBMS, etc.  Should those
>>application developers scatter embedded SQL all through their
>>application code?

>
>
> This is a culprit that OO people stubbornly refuse to understand.
> Embedding high level language (SQL) statements inside low level
> language (Java) is perfectly reasonable. What you propose instead, a
> pathetic set of classes that build the query dynamically?

I'm not sure what you mean by "a pathetic set of classes that build the query dynamically". Are you referring to Object-Relational Mappers here?

Joe Received on Wed May 31 2006 - 19:23:49 CEST

Original text of this message