Re: Flash to JOG

From: Bob Badour <>
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:24:07 -0300
Message-ID: <47d9390b$0$4056$>

JOG wrote:

> On Mar 13, 11:40 am, "David Cressey" <> wrote:

>>As you decide whether or not to respond to Perryman,  please consider that
>>there are a several of us who read what you write with interest.  We may not
>>always agree with you,  put you have commanded a level of respect from us
>>that makes Perryman's attempt at condescension ludicrous.
>>You need not descend to his level to defend your reputation with us.  And if
>>you're trying to raise him to your level, good luck.

> I appreciate the comments David (although I think most of the vitriol
> has been directed at topmind in this case). In general I think that
> the OO vanguard (as opposed to the rest of us who just use OO as a
> necessasry tool) have trouble with the conceptual/logical layer
> distinction that we all seem to see as bright as day. If nothing else
> our discussions with comp.oo have made me wonder why there are no
> programming languages that actively delineate the two, and break the
> concept that systems such as RM are merely for persistence.

Alphora's Dataphor Received on Thu Mar 13 2008 - 15:24:07 CET

Original text of this message