Re: Objects and Relations
Date: 8 Feb 2007 11:10:16 -0800
On Feb 8, 11:21 am, Gene Wirchenko <g..._at_ocis.net> wrote:
> "David BL" <davi..._at_iinet.net.au> wrote:
> >I'm amazed how Bob goes to such trouble to say nothing at all. It is
> That fits you very well. I thought you might have value to
> contribute to this newsgroup, but it appears you simply "raise
Don't let Gene's response discourage you. Some people do not like to discuss "issues" when they are raised, but they are certainly free to tune them out. I would rather you discussed it until you found some common ground where you and others could agree or agree to disagree and refine each others thoughts.
For example, even though I disagree with you (in previous postings), I had not before considered how a Stack class and an Employee class were much different. Each models a type of thing, but an instantiation of one actually IS a stack and an instantiation of the other is not an employee but a model of an employee. I haven't figured out why I might care about this and think it completely irrelevant to any discuss of OO compared to RM, but it was instructive none-the-less.
Summary - you are wrong ;-) but definitely free to raise and discuss issues. cheers! --dawn Received on Thu Feb 08 2007 - 20:10:16 CET