Re: The wisdom of the object mentors (Was: Searching OO Associations with RDBMS Persistence Models)
Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 08:31:41 +0100
"Daniel Parker" <danielaparker_at_gmail.com> wrote in message news:1150224450.502422.70520_at_c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Marshall wrote:
>>> Databases are data centric. While they have behaviors; those behaviors >>> are related to data management. Applications are behavior centric, >>> while they manipulate data, the things that do to that data are rich >>> with business rules and formatting behaviors.
>> I'm curious: do you have a definition of "behavior"? I hear this word
>> a lot and I'm not sure exactly what is intended. Is a method
>> behavior? Is a class behavior? What about a function? Is behavior
>> a transformation of data? Wouldn't this make it a synonym for
> Interestingly enough, in Abadi and Cardelli's book "A Theory of > Objects", there is no mention of "behavior." Attempts to put OO on a > firmer foundation do not seem to have a place for it.
That doesn't come as a surprise.
From a mathematical view, accessing an object property, whether that access simply returns an existing data value or invokes an operation that computes the value, is a moot point.
That is one reason I believe that FP holds the most promise for having systems that combine the OO and RM worlds in a consistent manner (ie not a C++ , not an SQL etc) .
Steven Perryman Received on Wed Jun 14 2006 - 09:31:41 CEST