Re: OO versus RDB

Marshall wrote:
> Reading the above, a lightbulb went off for me. Now I see where
> you're coming from: you are optimizing your code for following
> the latest trends in technology. Buzzword compliance management,
> so to speak.

hahahahaha - I echo Bob's laughter. Great phrase.

> If you're careful not to use anything of the systems
> you build software on, you can swap those systems out for new,
> more popular ones quite easily.
>
> This is probably a great idea, but it breaks down if one of
> those systems actually manages to supply something of
> value. You won't be able to make use of it.

Exactly 100% spot-on. Apparently the goal is to use subsystems, libraries, components, and other "assists" so useless that they are interchangeable with one another. No wonder we're getting nowhere as an industry; for years the pioneers in our field tried to build more and more powerful abstractions and languages, and now we seem to collectively believe that we've correctly identified lowest-common-denominator pigeonholes into which any "useful" component must fit.

Of course, this means lowest-common-denominator interfaces for all... woo hoo!

• Eric