Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: OO versus RDB

Re: OO versus RDB

From: erk <eric.kaun_at_gmail.com>
Date: 28 Jun 2006 06:31:25 -0700
Message-ID: <1151501485.755962.108350@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>


topmind wrote:
> [...] (Unlike OO, where encapsulation
> encourages each object/class to reinvent its own
> add/change/delete/cross-reference/search rules and interfaces so that
> they are all different for each project or shop.

Agreed. I wouldn't have a problem with inconsistencies if the languages just offered some powerful basic operations. You can't even write something in Java like this, which would be completely type-safe:

Set<LineItem> items =
theOrder.lineItems.where(item.status==Status.SHIPPED);

Instead, you write nested loops, or reflective methods with typecasting galore. With nothing similar to a relation, every distinct "query" result must have an object or interface, which leads to the sort of "load-it-all, save-it-all" code I typically see in O-O applications.

Ruby allows for much easier implementation of such code (and makes writing your own DSL easier), as does Python. Microsoft's .NET LINQ project is doing much better things.

However, no O-O language I know of offers constraints of any kind, or basic relational operators like joins (Rails does some light lifting, but no heavy lifting.), so these languages are impressive primarily by comparison with the festering stagnation of Java/J2EE, which has replaced MS as the industry's greatest damper on genuine progress.

Received on Wed Jun 28 2006 - 08:31:25 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US