Re: Object-relational impedence

From: David Cressey <>
Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 22:49:29 GMT
Message-ID: <Zf%yj.6219$Td2.3705_at_trndny08>

"Robert Martin" <> wrote in message news:2008030316112582327-unclebob_at_objectmentorcom...

> Ladies and gentlemen, there are certainly tasks that are better suited
> to SQL and stored procedures. There are other tasks that are better
> suited to general purpose languages. True wisdom comes from knowing
> the strengths and weaknesses of both. Good architects build systems
> that combine the tools synergistically.

Agreed. But often the suitability of a given task has less to do with the language
than it does with the domain of responsibilities of either data managers or code managers.

Both SQL and C++ are straw men in the sense that there are things that could be done quite differently if one were to reimplement from scratch, know what we now know.

I think it's relatively straight forward to extend a language like SQL so that it becomes a general purpose language. (Whether it becomes a good one or a bad one is a matter for further discussion). It doesn't seem as straightforward to me to extend a language like C++ so that it becomes suitable for declaring relational transformations on data. If it is straight forward, then I'd like to hear from people who are doing it.

But the idea of a single language that is suitable for everything remains an elusive goal, and probably an unproductive endeavor. Received on Mon Mar 03 2008 - 23:49:29 CET

Original text of this message