Re: Objects and Relations

Ignore BB's comments about comparing RM concepts to OO concepts. They are as wrong on a fundamental RM level as much as on OO perspective.

On Feb 21, 4:09 pm, Bob Badour <bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
> If "object" means object instances exclusively, then the term is
> synonymous with "variable". Why would one say "object" when one means
> "variable" ?
Huuh...Because of use of different terminology?

The equivalent of object instance is not relvar but relvalue (value of relation at spécific point in time). On the same wavelength, one could perceive object structure as a relvar and (object structure + constraints of instanciation on domain values) as relation.

Only difference is that relation, relvar and relvalue terminologies are mathematically inspired more reliable concepts while OO terminology can sometime be fuzzy as hell. Finally, there is not equivalent in OO of the concept of domain, a direct applied math concept. RM terminology is also more efficient and opens the door to conceptual tools that are almost unexistant in OO. That's the advantage of having RA as a foundation instead of computing... Received on Wed Feb 21 2007 - 16:37:33 CET