Re: The wisdom of the object mentors (Was: Searching OO Associations with RDBMS Persistence Models)

Robert Martin wrote:
> On 2006-06-20 15:01:44 -0700, frebe73_at_gmail.com said:

> Conclusion of this analysis is that objects and databases are distinct
> creatures that have no overlap. Objects belong inside applications as
> a structural tool for the behavior. Databases belong outside the
> applications, and should be used by the objects within those
> applications.

But they are mostly interchangable. Which-is-done-where is a fairly arbitrary call. In an extreme case, code is just *data* to an interpreter. And, table-centric solutions actually implement domain-specific interpreter(s) more or less, so the analogy is not that far off.

It has been said many times that one of the best productive abstraction techniques is to create a domain-specific sub-language using the app language. The same applies to a table-centric solution: build a domain-specific sub-interpreter.

Further, I like to use relational techniques on a "local" app level also, if available. It was common in the late 80's and early 90's, but fell at out of style as vendors felt OOP would replace it. Bad call. Fortunately tools like ColdFusion and Dot.Net are slowly bringing it back. I almost feel a pendulum swing....

>
>
> --
> Robert C. Martin (Uncle Bob) | email: unclebob_at_objectmentor.com

-T- Received on Tue Jul 04 2006 - 08:24:41 CEST