Re: Object-oriented thinking in SQL context?

From: jaygarrick7 <>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:15:03 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <>

On Jun 11, 12:54 am, Cimode <> wrote:
> > > This is a place of public speech about database science
> > No, that's what it's supposed to be.
> Now that is a common ground.  Do you accept the fact that there maybe
> different ways to do that ?
> > In fact, though, this "place" is
> > nothing more than a claque for Fabian Pascal, Chris Date and Hugh
> > Darwen, and a fortification against the advancement of useful new data
> > management theories (an oxymoron here, naturally) populated by
> > sclerotic epigones of those guiding lights just listed.
> To be qualified as *useful*, a data management theory must stand on
> its own feet and be subjected to public scrutiny.  This place also
> allows that.  I do not believe on the contrary that people who devoted
> their life to database management feel it as a claque since they are
> focus their energies on finding truth.
> > > Personal attacks...are to be avoided as much as possible
> > Agreed. In this case, it wasn't possible. Just like it wasn't possible
> > every time Badour called someone an idiot (often a "self-aggrandizing"
> > one), moron, twit or asshole, or when you called someone a chicken
> > shit.
> If you feel offended by BB or others, just ignore him or others (as
> simple as that).  I do not recall calling anybody *chicken shit* and
> since I do not ever recall using this specific expression, I would be
> glad if you could post where I said it.  But I admit I can get pretty
> frustrated and offended by the *I am ignorant and proud to be*
> attitude of some people who are not aware of their limits as far as
> database theory is concerned.  Since I find that attitude very
> offensive and disrespectful, I can understand how reactions may go
> over the edge whith people who promote this attitude.
> > >neither eloquence nor mumbo jumbo could be reasonnable substitutes for substance.
> > Sure--that's what postmodern literary theory is for.
> I am sorry I am not following you.
> > Anyhow, I look
> > forward to more substance here on such clearly related topics as
> > electrons, Clinton, Iraq, and speculations on whether a given poster's
> > first language is English.
> I believe I agree with that as I can see how this thread has gone off
> topic. What I meant by substance is database theory substance.

Given your thoughtful replies, I was wrong to have singled you out. Received on Thu Jun 11 2009 - 20:15:03 CEST

Original text of this message