Re: The wisdom of the object mentors (Was: Searching OO Associations with RDBMS Persistence Models)
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 12:23:07 GMT
Message-ID: <L4Wfg.16456$A26.380969_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>
> That's a complete non-sequitur from the sentence I took issue with.
> You said, "Isolate the data management mechanism from the data
> model." This has a very clear denotation: it means the dbms should
> not know the schema of the data it is managing. This is clearly
> self-contradictory. Perhaps you didn't mean that? Perhaps the
> later "it's called decoupling" paragraph is more like what you
> really meant to say?
Date: Fri, 02 Jun 2006 12:23:07 GMT
Message-ID: <L4Wfg.16456$A26.380969_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
Marshall wrote:
> Robert Martin wrote:
>
>>On 2006-05-31 12:44:04 -0500, "Marshall" <marshall.spight_at_gmail.com> said: >> >>>Wow, I missed that one completely. "Isolate the data management >>>mechanism from the data model." How in tarnation is the data >>>manager doing to manage the data if it is isolated from the >>>data model? >> >>It's called decoupling. Generally it's based on dynamic polymorphism >>which is a lot of syllables that really mean function pointers. The >>idea is that you write the application program in such a way that it >>can manipulate the data in the data model without coupling it directly >>to the DBMS, or the details of the schema. The decoupling mechanism is >>very similar to the mechanism used to create device independence in >>operating systems like Unix.
>
> That's a complete non-sequitur from the sentence I took issue with.
> You said, "Isolate the data management mechanism from the data
> model." This has a very clear denotation: it means the dbms should
> not know the schema of the data it is managing. This is clearly
> self-contradictory. Perhaps you didn't mean that? Perhaps the
> later "it's called decoupling" paragraph is more like what you
> really meant to say?
Whether the functions are statically bound, dynamically bound or even dispatched through some completely different mechanism like RPC, a message queue, a pipe (named or otherwise), or a shared file is totally irrelevant to the issue of decoupling.
He is an incompetent self-aggrandizing ignorant. He has proved beyond any possible doubt that he no longer deserves any benefit of any doubt. He is an idiot. Received on Fri Jun 02 2006 - 14:23:07 CEST