Re: What databases have taught me
From: J M Davitt <jdavitt_at_aeneas.net>
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 02:59:18 GMT
Message-ID: <aU1ng.78284$YI5.69003_at_tornado.ohiordc.rr.com>
>
>
> I disagree. We learned that OO was not hiearchy in the early 90s. OO
> is dynamic polymorpism directed towards the purpose of managing
> dependencies.
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 02:59:18 GMT
Message-ID: <aU1ng.78284$YI5.69003_at_tornado.ohiordc.rr.com>
Robert Martin wrote:
> On 2006-06-22 20:34:48 -0500, "JOG" <jog_at_cs.nott.ac.uk> said:
>
>> OO is hierarchy.
>
>
> I disagree. We learned that OO was not hiearchy in the early 90s. OO
> is dynamic polymorpism directed towards the purpose of managing
> dependencies.
Dynamic polymorphism? What's that?
I'm familiar with operations defined over more than one type
of operand and with different operations having the same
operator - but I don't know what you mean when you say "dynamic."
And please explain "directed towards the purpose of managing dependencies."