Re: OOP - a question about database access

"Uncle Bob (Robert C. Martin)" <u.n.c.l.e.b.o.b_at_objectmentor.com> wrote in message news:8c3oqvktvucsfc232po13ojuvpgk448bn2_at_4ax.com...
> "Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_golden.net> might (or might not) have written
> this on (or about) Fri, 7 Nov 2003 09:07:48 -0500, :
>
> >"Alfredo Novoa" <alfredo_at_ncs.es> wrote in message
> >news:e4330f45.0311070504.e6aebd_at_posting.google.com...
> >> "Uncle Bob (Robert C. Martin)" <u.n.c.l.e.b.o.b_at_objectmentor.com> wrote
in
> >message news:<ig2lqvsfbjjhcniov8lskbdpogkd2oagvb_at_4ax.com>...
> >>
> >> > >Objects like Employee, Customer, etc are completely unnecessary
> >> > >because that entities are already managed by the DBMS. You only need
> >> > >to map the database tables to visual controls like grids, edits,
etc.
> >> >
> >> > This might be true if the database application does absolutely not
> >> > processing of the data. If there are no business rules, and the
> >> > system does nothing more than add, display, modify, and delete
> >> > records, then having entity objects may not be very useful. On the
> >> > other hand, as soon as you add any business rules, such as field
> >> > validation, or summary reporting, etc. you need a way to separate
> >> > those rules from the database. That's one very useful application
for
> >> > OO.
> >>
> >> What a pearl!
> >>
> >> Sorry for the crossposting again, but I find things like this
> >> interesting in order to understand the current state of the IT
> >> industry.
> >>
> >> If recognized OO writers show this "understanding" of the data
> >> management issues, imagine the rest.
> >
> >Yep, it's widespread and piled high.
>
> That's "Piled Higher and Deeper" i.e. PHD.
>
> Anyway I now see the reason for all this rude angst. These articles
> are cross posted to "databases.theory". No wonder!

Sorry, you must have omitted your degree from your .sig line. I find it interesting that you perceive my observations as angst. Received on Sat Nov 08 2003 - 01:25:12 CET