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

From: x <>
Date: Thu, 1 Jun 2006 14:01:18 +0300
Message-ID: <e5mh89$rna$>

"Dmitry A. Kazakov" <> wrote in message news:1lrornqlsngid.1g1itr3c2tr04$
> On 1 Jun 2006 02:58:43 -0700, Erwin wrote:

> >
> > Note further that the OO crowd always uses the term with respect to one
> > single thing ("the identity of an object").
> This is not true. As for identity of objects there are many of. For
> example, polymorphic objects have the identity of its specific type. The
> identity of objects in its usual sense is not required in OO. It is quite
> possible to have unidentifiable objects.

UFOs ?

> > The OO crowd thus never uses that term in the "relational" sense of the
> > word.

> I don't see much difference in respect of identity. The standpoint is that
> there is no data, only behavior.

> Data is expressed in observed behavior.

What this means ? How ?
The change of data is the data but there is no data ? Received on Thu Jun 01 2006 - 13:01:18 CEST

Original text of this message