Re: Object-relational impedence

From: Leslie Sanford <jabberdabber_at_bitemehotmail.com>
Date: Sun, 16 Mar 2008 23:56:33 -0500
Message-ID: <47ddfa17$0$30701$4c368faf_at_roadrunner.com>


"David BL" wrote:

<snip>

> Consider the following three groups of names
>
> A: int, double, point, circle, ellipse, square, string, set<int>,
> tuple, relation
>
> B: employee, company, invoice, manager, department
>
> C: mutex, textbutton, guiwindow, stack, queue, threadpool,
> printerproxy
>
>
> Consider these as names for built-in types, structs or classes in a
> language like C++. I'm characterising the groups as follows
>
> A: These are value-types. A value is mathematically well defined,
> eternal and immutable. A value-type is a set of values plus
> operations on those values. Variables of a value-type can normally be
> assigned with any value of that type.
>
> B: These are conceptual things that aren't mathematically formalised
> and typically exist in time and space but are external to the abstract
> computational machine
>
> C: These designate types of objects where object means an identifiable
> abstract state machine embedded within an overall abstract
> computational machine. Objects do not generally represent values and
> do not in general support assignment. Objects always have identity,
> state and behaviour with respect to the abstract machine. Objects
> cannot be understood outside the computational machine in which they
> are defined.

<snip rest>

This was a tour de force post. I enjoyed it quite a bit. Thanks. Received on Mon Mar 17 2008 - 05:56:33 CET

Original text of this message