Re: Real World (Re: Mixing OO and DB)

On Mar 18, 3:33 am, topmind <topm..._at_technologist.com> wrote:
> Cimode wrote:
> > On 18 mar, 00:14, topmind <topm..._at_technologist.com> wrote:
> > One does not have to be a genius to favor set oriented approaches only
> > *aware* of its superiority. Gymnastics and discipline do the rest.
>
> Perhaps if we had something more powerful than SQL then it would be
> easier to do (and learn) the stuff that is often handled over to
> imperative approaches.
That is not the way I would put it.
The *stuff* is mishandled in the first place by the inability unwillingness of most database practionners and designers of getting a formal education on relational principles. They simply get a distorded view of what RM through SQL does *then* SQL makes their life more or less miserable.

> I'd love to have programmer-defined views and functions to use with a
> query language and friendlier ways to manage large column lists using
> the same set engine (or easier to swap row-based to column-based views
> to avoid needing lots of columns). We need a relational Lisp to spark
> new query languages.
SQL drawbacks are countless: verbosity, acceptance of NULLS etc...

> -T-
Received on Tue Mar 18 2008 - 08:12:18 CET