Re: The wisdom of the object mentors (Was: Searching OO Associations with RDBMS Persistence Models)
Date: 20 Jun 2006 10:35:32 -0700
Robert Martin wrote:
> On 2006-06-13 09:10:52 -0400, "erk" <eric.kaun_at_gmail.com> said:
> > And to address your point even more directly, a relational calculus IS
> > simpler than a "bucket of bits." Presumably, you believe that objects
> > are simpler (for us, the users!) than direct memory addresses and the
> > typeless values stored therein?
> Yes, I quite agree. I also think that abstraction is a very powerful
> tool. So I think I benefit from simplicity if I can relegate all that
> relational calculus to one part of the program and allow the other
> parts of the program to treat the DB as a bucket of bits.
This is the very fist time I see this term -- "bucket of bits". I checked the thesaurus and found it synonymous to "piece of shit". Reread what you wrote with this substitution. Received on Tue Jun 20 2006 - 19:35:32 CEST