Re: Object-oriented thinking in SQL context?
Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2009 16:28:40 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <3884298d-6e7b-4140-82a5-8f7b46ef2fdc_at_j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>
On Jun 20, 9:11 pm, Keith H Duggar <dug..._at_alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>
> > One could use a dictionary to implement name-based plain composition,
> > though. Is that correct?
>
> You probably already know this but C++ supports arrays and (with
> libraries) associative array. I've found them fairly useful when
> implementing some of the relational ideas I've learned from this
> newsgroup and the classic books.
C++ is officially a "multi-paradigm" language, rather than an OO language per se. In other words, it has features from many computing models, including OO-style features, thrown together in an entirely ad-hoc fashion.
Which is not to say that I necessarily think C++ sucks; it is certainly quite a design achievement to shoehorn all that stuff in there and stay as close to C as was done! The market success of the language is no small achievement either. But whatever C++'s virtues, elegance is not one of them.
> Of course, they are no substitute for native relational language
> support.
No question.<sob>
Marshall Received on Mon Jun 22 2009 - 01:28:40 CEST