Re: Mixing OO and DB

From: Dmitry A. Kazakov <mailbox_at_dmitry-kazakov.de>
Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 10:24:50 +0100
Message-ID: <10s3ce0wb1jjw.t5bw9w3y6jet$.dlg_at_40tude.net>

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008 22:27:03 -0500, Patrick May wrote:

> Eric <eric_at_deptj.demon.co.uk> writes:

>> Objects are a useful tool but they are not universal, you do not
>> have to use them for everything, and you must _not_ campaign to have
>> them used for everything. Stop, and realise that there is a wider
>> picture.


> 

>      The same can be said for any approach, including relational.  I

> know, I've said it. I suggest you take your own advice regarding the
> wider picture.

Well, the ongoing discussion between c.o and c.d.t is not / should not be about approaches. In question is a descriptive framework in which approaches could be evaluated. Evaluating an approach either by naming people using it idiots or even by market shares makes no technical sense to me. So long no such framework is not agreed on, it is useless to discuss "approaches".

As for objects. A notion equivalent to "computational object" will be a part of such framework, though not necessarily of a particular approach. Thus, no, computational objects are universal.

-- 
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de

Received on Sat Mar 01 2008 - 10:24:50 CET