Re: The wisdom of the object mentors (Was: Searching OO Associations with RDBMS Persistence Models)
Date: 21 Jun 2006 12:35:01 -0700
Robert Martin wrote:
> On 2006-06-09 04:11:32 -0400, mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org> said:
> > "Applications should not strongly
> > depend on a navigational format unless that
> > format IS the most convenient form for them.":
> > a matter of convenience for some applications
> > at the cost of convenience for other applications.
> And so each application programmer needs to decide what form the data
> is most convient in, and convert from the canonical DB form to that
> convenient form.
To a limited extent only. It does not make sense to have a jillion different conventions. Unless one convention is largely better than a standard, it is best to stick with the standard. Relational is pretty flexible for most things (especially if you have a good DB or table engine). Thus, I see unsufficient reason to translate back and forth between relational and navigational for most custom software. Since RDBMS are not going away anytime soon, it makes sense to embrace relational than to fight it with thick wrappers and translators.
However, I understand that some really like navigational viewpoints and claim to work better under them. It is hard to make everybody happy. It would be interesting to find the psychological reasons behind the differences in preference.
> Robert C. Martin (Uncle Bob) | email: unclebob_at_objectmentor.com
-T- Received on Wed Jun 21 2006 - 21:35:01 CEST