Re: Object-relational impedence
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 21:28:40 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <83187186-dcda-4d01-a3df-ce2c09875713_at_u10g2000prn.googlegroups.com>
On Mar 10, 5:47 pm, Robert Martin <uncle..._at_objectmentor.com> wrote:
>
> So then this post was an attempt to attenuate controversy?
Yes. Not that I am necessarily against controversy, but
perhaps one at a time is a good working limit. :-)
Just as every superhero must have a nemesis,
so must every newsgroup have a nemesis. And just as
with superheroes, the hero/nemesis conflict is unresolvable,
fundamental; it is inseparably entangled in the very identity
of the participants. Only the destruction of one or the other
can resolve the conflict. And of course, each participant
self-identifies as the hero.
Clearly comp.object and comp.databases.theory form just
such a dyad, with data-centered vs. code-centered thinking
the unresolvable heart of the conflict. ORMs are just flashpoints
for the controversy. (ORMs being comparable to Gorilla Grodd's
attempt to turn all the humans on Earth into gorillas, thwarted
by the Justice League, thank goodness!)
Another such dyad is comp.lang.functional and comp.lang.lisp.
The unresolvable conflict between them is static vs. dynamic
typing. Once a year or so, the groups break out in open hostility.
Sometimes this is the result of a deliberate breaking of the cease
fire by an embedded agent provocateur, (such as the last time
Clan Object and Clan Database Theory fought) and sometimes
it is by an innocent (or was he?!) crosspost by a unwitting noob,
as in the current round of atrocities.
Marshall