Re: Unknown SQL

Philip Lijnzaad wrote:
> Bob> When it comes to OODBMS vendors supporting exactly the same
 programming
> Bob> language, they expose additional physical implementation details over
 and
> Bob> above those inherent in the language:
>
> yes, I agree, and that alone is enough to guarantee the lack of a OODBMS
> standard for years to come.

We are trying to address ths as good as we can by storing objects without the need to implement a specific interface or derive from a specific base class. There are no proxy objects. There is no code-modifier. Classes do not need to implement the serializable interface. All is done by reflection. Version 1.1., due to be released today (give us another week) understands arrays, n-dimensional arrays, classes without public constructors, inner classes, all JDK Collection classes, simple types, interfaces ... just about everything that makes up the Java programming language. All concepts are proprietary to Java, not to us.

As far as I know, our product is the only object database with this approach. Our point of view:
The less additional concepts a database adds, - the easier the use will be.
- the higher the chances are, to reach a standard

A query language is *not* included with the Java programming language. A standard would be great.
That's why I started this discussion to hopefully get some people together.

Kind regards,
Carl

---
Carl Rosenberger
db4o - database for objects - http://www.db4o.com