Re: Methods as Comments (Re: Mixing OO and DB)

Cimode wrote:
...
> Stupid, dumb but not oversimplified. Have you noticed how idiots
> always rely on vague generalized concept to make points.

It's a general trend. Pompousity and tapioca vocabularies are on the rise in most of western society. A local dog-walker says 'urban setting' instead of city, a friend confuses 'communication' with talk and agreement, lots of people now say 'issue' instead of problem.

For years, OO fans have confused imprecise talk with increased productivity while the applications for OO are limited to narrow aspects of certain programmer and user interfaces. Many still do not seem to dig the incisive abstractions that people such as Codd or for that matter Bricklin came up with, exposing the interpretation of relations to users or removing formulas from programs. From the other meandering posts here, we can see what the OO people are really selling - complexity with the goal of exclusive franchises for the Emperor's tailor. Received on Thu Mar 06 2008 - 17:45:45 CET