Re: OO versus RDB

From: Bob Badour <>
Date: Wed, 28 Jun 2006 16:18:18 GMT
Message-ID: <eZxog.3346$>

Christian Brunschen wrote:

> In article <>,
> erk <> wrote:

>>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 =

> Perhaps somewhat interestingly, in a dynamic OO language such as
> Smalltalk, Objective-C or Ruby, you can use the technique of Higher-Order
> Messaging (HOM), as described in the 2005 OOPLSA paper
> <>, to do
> something quite similar; in Objective-C syntax something like
> NSSet *lineItems =
> [[[[order lineItems] selectWhere] status] equals:STATUS_SHIPPED];

You have given an example involving only restriction. Does the method work for project, extend and join as well? Received on Wed Jun 28 2006 - 18:18:18 CEST

Original text of this message