Re: Object-relational impedence
From: David Cressey <cressey73_at_verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:52:09 GMT
Message-ID: <Z9aBj.2903$ox3.565_at_trndny04>
> The 'life' a variable hase outside it's scope is half-life at best.
> The variable does occupy resources, but in order to be useful in
> any way it has to be in scope.
>
>
In addition, the lifetime of the association betwen a variable and a given value is different from the lifetime of the variable itself. Received on Mon Mar 10 2008 - 13:52:09 CET
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 12:52:09 GMT
Message-ID: <Z9aBj.2903$ox3.565_at_trndny04>
"mAsterdam" <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org> wrote in message
news:47d4e9ac$0$14352$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl...
> Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> > David Cressey wrote:
> >
> > [snip]
> >
> >> I disagree. It's clear enough for discussion purposes. A value stored
in a
> >> variable lives in the scope of that variable, until it's copied
(forwarded)
> >> to another place.
> >
> > Well, no, it does not. A variable has its value during its
> > LIFETIME. It can be referred to in its SCOPE. These can be the same
> > for a variable, but they can be different.
>
> The 'life' a variable hase outside it's scope is half-life at best.
> The variable does occupy resources, but in order to be useful in
> any way it has to be in scope.
>
>
In addition, the lifetime of the association betwen a variable and a given value is different from the lifetime of the variable itself. Received on Mon Mar 10 2008 - 13:52:09 CET