Re: Object-relational impedence
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:59:08 -0300
Message-ID: <47ddde7e$0$4055$9a566e8b_at_news.aliant.net>
>>On 2008-03-14 00:17:40 -0500, frebe <frebe73_at_gmail.com> said:
>>
>>>On 13 Mar, 18:40, Robert Martin <uncle..._at_objectmentor.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>The real point of that remark was that the user of a tool is at a
>>>>higher level of abstraction than the tool itself. �SQL is a tool. �ORMs
>>>>are tools that use SQL to get their job done, just like compilers use
>>>>assembly to get their job done. �In that sense ORMs live at a higher
>>>>level of abstraction than SQL.
>>>
>>>Lets have an example: There are many "compiler" products translating
>>>from a high-level language like ADA to a low-level language like C,
>>>instead of translating to machine code directly. What if someone wrote
>>>a "compiler" translating C source code to ADA source code, would that
>>>make C more high level than ADA? Hardly? The existance of a product
>>>translating from language A to language B doesn't say anything about
>>>the levels of A and B.
>>
>>That's a good point. The fact that you can write a translator from
>>A->B does not mean A is higher level than B.
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:59:08 -0300
Message-ID: <47ddde7e$0$4055$9a566e8b_at_news.aliant.net>
topmind wrote:
> Robert Martin wrote: >
>>On 2008-03-14 00:17:40 -0500, frebe <frebe73_at_gmail.com> said:
>>
>>>On 13 Mar, 18:40, Robert Martin <uncle..._at_objectmentor.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>The real point of that remark was that the user of a tool is at a
>>>>higher level of abstraction than the tool itself. �SQL is a tool. �ORMs
>>>>are tools that use SQL to get their job done, just like compilers use
>>>>assembly to get their job done. �In that sense ORMs live at a higher
>>>>level of abstraction than SQL.
>>>
>>>Lets have an example: There are many "compiler" products translating
>>>from a high-level language like ADA to a low-level language like C,
>>>instead of translating to machine code directly. What if someone wrote
>>>a "compiler" translating C source code to ADA source code, would that
>>>make C more high level than ADA? Hardly? The existance of a product
>>>translating from language A to language B doesn't say anything about
>>>the levels of A and B.
>>
>>That's a good point. The fact that you can write a translator from
>>A->B does not mean A is higher level than B.
Quite the contrary. In every case of a higher level language B, one can write a translator for it in a lower level language A. This is patently obvious, because ultimately everything has to translate to machine code, which is the lowest-level language of all. Received on Mon Mar 17 2008 - 03:59:08 CET