Re: Mixing OO and DB

From: topmind <topmind_at_technologist.com>
Date: Sun, 17 Feb 2008 00:31:30 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <15d545a8-f81e-43f0-bd6b-bcc6ec238102_at_s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com>


rpost wrote:
> topmind wrote:
>
> >It's called a "compiled language". If you have an interpreted
> >language, you have more opportunity for a program to "examine itself"
> >because interpreted languages tend to KEEP the programming structures/
> >idioms that the code turns into. I don't see how this has anything to
> >do with OO versus procedural. LISP, for example, is highly self-
> >examining and was created long before Pascal.
>
> I'm sorry, but this is no longer true, if it ever was. Java and .NET
> languages are compiled (sometimes JIT, but still) and they have self-
> examination (e.g. reflection).

No, they are hybrids between compiled and interpreted. It seems "true" compiled languages are a thing of the past.

>
> >For efficiency, true-compiled languages need to toss higher-level
> >structures, meaning there is less of them to examine at run-time. Java
> >is not a truely compiled language, but a hybrid, I would note.
>
> Irrelevant. How Java is compiled doesn't affect its reflection support.

If a compiler completely tosses high-level information, then it is not available at run-time. For example, a true compiler would NOT store the text name of a class or variable, but rather only keep the binary address (101011101010101 and so forth).

>
> --
> Reinier

-T- Received on Sun Feb 17 2008 - 09:31:30 CET

Original text of this message