Re: OT fallacies

From: mAsterdam <>
Date: Mon, 05 Jun 2006 22:43:28 +0200
Message-ID: <4484972b$0$31643$>

Please do not misattribute your writings to me.

Patrick May wrote:

>>>     I did not find him backing up his claims regarding
>>>Mr. Martin's "foolishness".  Can you or can you not point out a
>>>specific example of him doing so?
>>>Robert Martin ha escrito:
>>>Ridiculous.  OO and RDB coexist very nicely together.  I've never
>>>heard anyone suggest that searches aren't needed.
>>Relational databases have nothing to do with searches. This shows
>>profound ignorance about data management theory.

> For the record, Mr. Martin was responding to the following:
>>Many OO evangelists claim that searches are not needed in well
>>design OO applications. You have to redesign your application to
>>avoid the scenario above. Obviously reporting, etc, should not be
>>done using OOA/D.

Which, in turn, was in response to the OP, which included this remark:
> ************************
> In the database world, this is a simple join across two tables.
> *************************

Patrick May wrote:
> In this context,

The context is - at least - all of the thread leading up to the claims and all subsequent posts by both posters.

See below.

> neither of Mr. Martin's statements are prima facie
> foolish. More importantly, Mr. Novoa's response does not demonstrate
> any foolishness on Mr. Martin's part.

YMMV Context available at

so those who want to form an opinion on whether any foolishness was demonstrated can judge for themselves.

[snip hypothesis] Received on Mon Jun 05 2006 - 22:43:28 CEST

Original text of this message