Re: Oracle8's new features - what are they

Akmal B Chaudhri wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 May 1997, Joshua Duhl wrote:
>
> > Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 19:29:43 -0400
> > From: Joshua Duhl <no.spam.jduhl_at_mediaone.net>
> > >
> > > And I don't see
> > > > where you get the "methods" from. Where's the encapsulation?
> > >
> > > Couldn't stored procedures be considered a _form_ of encapsulation?
> >
> > Well I guess you could say they are a "form" of methods and
> > support a limited notion of encapsulation but only in the
> > most losest of senses for both. Stored procedures are not
> > strictly associated with a type. They are associated with
> > a table or multiple tables. So they are not methods per se.
> > Secondly, it may be possible to bypass a stored producedure
> > to access data directly thus violating the fundamental notion
> > of encapsulation.
>
> O.K. but are there not some OO languages that support the notion of "free
> procedures" that are not aattached to any particular class? (Here I'm
> asking a question, not trying to challenge what you are saying).

Yes, some OO languages support a notion of "free procedures" as you define. By contrast, every stored procedure is associated with one or more table. So it is not exactly "free". But you might be able to get away with saying that stored procedures are a _form_ free procedures. But then do we have to say that SQL is an OO language? :-)

Also, I'm sure you've seen the example posted in this thread which demonstrate methods associated with an ADT in Oracle8, but they don't support encapsulation, which was also stated in those other postings.

<... remainder was snipped...>

• Joshua Duhl

Just getting even with spammers: postmaster_at_cyberpromo.com, postmaster_at_moonglow.com, postoffice_at_mooglow.com, postmaster_at_savetrees.com, postmaster_at_hotmail.com, americom_at_mcsi.net, cash_at_fortune-wheel.com,

postmaster_at_fortune-wheel.com, accesstwo_at_industryone.net, 
postmaster_at_industryone.net, carproinc_at_answerme.com, 
postmaster_at_answerme.com