Re: An object-oriented network DBMS from relational DBMS point of view

From: Marshall <marshall.spight_at_gmail.com>
Date: 18 Mar 2007 19:08:54 -0700
Message-ID: <1174270133.975544.298950@l77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>

On Mar 18, 3:33 pm, "Alfredo Novoa" <alfred..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On 18 mar, 18:18, "Marshall" <marshall.spi..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 18, 3:05 am, "Drago Ganic" <dga..._at_vodatel.net> wrote:
> > My take on the well-definedness of the term "object" is slightly
> > different than Bob's. I would say that in fact, the term "object"
> > is quite well defined--in a number of different places, each with
> > a different way. The C++ standard has one, the Java Language
> > Spec has one,
>
> Let's see.
>
> 4.3.1 Objects
> An object is a class instance or an array.
>
> http://java.sun.com/docs/books/jls/third_edition/html/typesValues.htm...
>
> No, it is not quite well defined.

In what way is that not well-defined? "A legal entity is either a person or a corporation." No problem.

Marshall Received on Sun Mar 18 2007 - 21:08:54 CDT