Re: OO versus RDB

H. S. Lahman wrote:
> Responding to Marshall...
> >>
> >>I'm afraid that is not true. Consider
> >>[changing the name of an attribute]
> >
> >
> > Sure, if the change is trivial (in that it has no associated
> > change in semantics) it might not be the case that
> > anything besides the query needs to change. You don't
> > even need a view, just change "SELECT salary, ..."
> > to "SELECT base_salary as salary, ..."
>
> While trivial it does reflect a change to the client and any change to
> the client presents an opportunity for inserting a defect that will
> render the problem solution incorrect. My issues in this thread are
> change management and defect prevention on the client side.

Trivial examples illustrate trivial principles: in the case, alpha equivalence.

> One way to
> address those issues is through modularization that decouples the data
> storage and access mechanisms from the problem solution logic.

And I've pointed out the flaw in trying to achieve this otherwise laudable end by treating a dbms this way many times.

Marshall Received on Sat Jul 01 2006 - 19:45:45 CEST