Re: The Terrific Trio

Responding to Badour...

>>> I've been mulling over the discussion about mixing OO and DB, with
>>> an eye
>>> towards coming up with a system that permits an object world and a
>>> relational schema to interact and collaborate productively. So far,
>>> I've
>>> got three components that each cover a piece of the territory.
>>
>> Why? It seems to me the existing technologies are more than adequate.
>>
>> The RAD IDEs and layered model infrastructures already have CRUD/USER
>> processing well covered.
>>
>> For non-CRUD/USER applications one can abstract the existing RDB
>> paradigm once in a subsystem. Then one can reuse that subsystem across
>> applications by simply providing an application-specific interface
>> (think: Facade pattern) and an external configuration file to map
>> identity through that interface.

> 
> What a dumb idea! By what measure is that supposed to be better than 
> application views?!? I am sticking with CURLY!

Design reuse, implementation reuse, enhanced productivity, reduced defects, and storage paradigm transparency.

-- 
There is nothing wrong with me that could
not be cured by a capful of Drano.

H. S. Lahman
hsl_at_pathfindermda.com
Pathfinder Solutions
http://www.pathfindermda.com
blog: http://pathfinderpeople.blogs.com/hslahman
"Model-Based Translation: The Next Step in Agile Development".  Email
info_at_pathfindermda.com for your copy.
Pathfinder is hiring: 
http://www.pathfindermda.com/about_us/careers_pos3.php.
(888)OOA-PATH