Re: OO solution?

From: David Cressey <>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 11:34:43 GMT
Message-ID: <nPtog.9551$U%1.4172_at_trndny07>

<> wrote in message

> All, my apologies. After reading these responses, I read the posts I
> made in a new light, and realized that coming from a new user to a
> newsgroup - and with a good probability of said user being a OO
> enthusiast from the c.o. group - the parody was not nearly as overt as
> I intended.
> In lieu of that, I truly am sorry for any time anyone may have spent
> formulating, composing or posting legitimate replies to the posts.
> Yes, that includes Bob.

You got me. I thought it was serious. That probably means that it's good satire.

I recently picked up and read a windows oriented "Hello World" program in C++ from an old distribution of Turbo C++. It reads like satire. But I think they were serious.

I spend a lot of time in c.d.t. trying to understand ideas that I think are profoundly wrong. Perhaps, too much time. We've had people come in here and seriously suggest that we revert to the state of data modeling in 1969, and pick it up from there.

One person maintained, for years, that with a suitably clever access langugage all you need is character based data types, structured into files made up of records, records made up of fields, and fields made up of lists of values. She maintained that position for years in here. If that was satire, it was damned good satire.

And I can't tell you the number of people who have come into c.d.t. and suggested that the best design for relations is to put all the data into one big table.

So I forgive myself for having been taken. And I forgive you for being too subtle for this medium. Received on Wed Jun 28 2006 - 13:34:43 CEST

Original text of this message