Re: Mixing OO and DB
From: Robert Martin <unclebob_at_objectmentor.com>
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 19:42:42 -0600
Message-ID: <2008030819424211272-unclebob_at_objectmentorcom>
>
> You repeat the same simplistic slogans
>
> Can you then hide OOP for me so that I don't have to deal with it?
> After all, OOP is an "implementation detail".
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 19:42:42 -0600
Message-ID: <2008030819424211272-unclebob_at_objectmentorcom>
On 2008-03-06 15:23:41 -0600, topmind <topmind_at_technologist.com> said:
>
>
> Robert Martin wrote:
>> On 2008-03-05 00:20:57 -0600, frebe <frebe73_at_gmail.com> said: >> >>> The reason OO people like to "decouple" the SQL statements is: >>> 1. OO languages doesn't have good support for embedding SQL. >>> 2. OO like to model data as a network graph, in opposite to the >>> relational model. >> >> OO people like to decouple SQL because >> 1. They don't like mixing high level policy code with low level detail >> code. They'd rather partition their code based on abstraction level.
>
> You repeat the same simplistic slogans
This from the man who gave us "function dandruff".
> over and over again until you believe them, like Bush.
Do you really want to bring politics into this? Some of us thing Mr. Bush has done a very good job.
> SQL is *not* any more "low level" than your
> app language (unless you are using it wrong).
SQL is not low level. The details of a query are.
>> 2. They don't like tying themselves to a particular implementation. >> They want to be able to easily replace the SQL with something else
>
> Can you then hide OOP for me so that I don't have to deal with it?
> After all, OOP is an "implementation detail".
I can hide most of the low level behaviors of the application, and of the OO language, yes.
-- Robert C. Martin (Uncle Bob) | email: unclebob_at_objectmentor.com Object Mentor Inc. | blog: www.butunclebob.com The Agile Transition Experts | web: www.objectmentor.com 800-338-6716 |Received on Sun Mar 09 2008 - 02:42:42 CET