Re: What databases have taught me

From: Frans Bouma <>
Date: 23 Jun 2006 13:40:00 GMT
Message-Id: <>

Bob Badour wrote:
> Frans Bouma wrote:
> > JOG wrote:
> >
> > > Well after a brief hiatus I have just ploughed through the whole
> > > 800 posts of the OO vs RM thread. Some discouraging stuff indeed.
> > > Over the last few years a study of database technology, helped
> > > greatly by discussions in cdt, has educated my opinions
> > > significantly, and perhaps my albeit slow progress can be
> > > illuminative to others.
> >
> > Please also realize that in comp.databases*, a lot of people are
> > die-hard database pundits who preach to implement everything of an
> > application inside the DB, including BL.
> I assume BL=business logic. What, exactly, is your objection to using
> predicate logic for dealing with logic? (Other than ignorance.)
> Exactly what formalism do you propose that surpasses the predicate
> calculus for dealing with logic?

        Oh dear, it was crossposted.

        I wasn't talking about predicate calculus, I was talking about a complete middle-tier business logic tier. But let's not go there, I don't want a discussion about that with people who think everything except perhaps the bare-bones gui should be inside an RDBMS system. let's agree to disagree on that, we just share different views on that topic.

> > > - I started life as a procedural programmer.
> > > - I adopted OO and soon got the 'aha' click described by R.
> > > Martin. - I spent years coding large OO projects, with
> > > beautiful, elegant architectures.
> > > - I spent further years practically gnawing my arm off attempting
> > > to adapt my perfect OO designs as requirements inevitably shifted
> > > and exceptions arose.
> > > - I finally realised that my 'aha' was utterly illusionary, and
> > > that my code, being OO, was inevitably and irrecovably imprisoned
> > > in a hierarchical strait-jacket
> >
> > I don't know anything about you nor your projects, so I can't
> > comment on the experiences you got if they're the result of OO or
> > the result of applying OO wrong.
> From the little bit you write here, I know a lot about you. For
> instance, you know little or nothing about higher-level abstractions,
> the benefits of symmetric operations, the advantages of declarative
> techniques over procedural techniques, robust type systems,
> separation of concerns and probably a whole host of other fundamental
> concepts.

        Which part of "So I can't comment on..." don't you understand?

> Your speculation over JOG's limitations proves only your own.

        that's your interpretation, I just wanted to formulate that what his experiences were could be the result of wrongly applied OOP, which could perfectly be caused by his teammembers, or by a skewed project description or whatever.

> I can comment on JOG--his experiences have nothing to do with a
> misapplication of OO.

        That's great to know, it wasn't in the posting. Again, my goal wasn't to judge the poster's knowledge, just that it's perfectly possible to have bad experiences with OO like with any technology/method, and thus that could influence how you think about it.

> > What I can say is that if you don't realize that <insert tech /
> > paradigm here>
> The surest sign of a self-aggrandizing ignorant is the wanton use of
> the word 'paradigm' which has many meanings where for each meaning a
> better word exists.

	so, all you want is just flame me. Cool, have fun, Bob. 
Received on Fri Jun 23 2006 - 15:40:00 CEST

Original text of this message