Re: OOP - a question about database access
From: Alain Javier Guarnieri del Gesu <nntp_at_ajgdg.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 00:54:41 GMT
Message-Id: <slrnbqtnpf.euq.nntp_at_ajgdg.com.invalid>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 00:54:41 GMT
Message-Id: <slrnbqtnpf.euq.nntp_at_ajgdg.com.invalid>
- Bruce <brennie_at_dcsi.net.au>:
> Alain Javier Guarnieri del Gesu <nntp_at_ajgdg.com> wrote in message news:<slrnbqr852.bf4.nntp@ajgdg.com.invalid>...
>> * Bob Badour <bbadour_at_golden.net>: >> > Personally, I do not hang out in comp.object. Having long ago >> > mastered the technology, I find comp.object infertile ground and a >> > waste of time. I foresee no important advances there given the >> > primitiveness of the computational model and the distinct lack of >> > advances in past decades. You only see my posts because this >> > thread is cross-posted to comp.databases.theory, where I see very >> > fertile ground. >> >> Coming in to the thread a little late, but, do you feel that OO is >> infertile and a waste of time for developing, say windowing >> environments, or a web server? It seems to me that is is a useful >> disicpline for certian applications. I've always found the Person -> >> Employee -> SalariedEmployee example to be contrived, but I don't >> see how one goes about game programming in relational algebra.
>
> Try the following quote from Tim Rentsch(I hope I get this right)
>
> "What is object oriented programming? My guess is that object oriented
> programming will be in the 1980s what structured programming was in
> the 1970s. Everyone will be in favour of it. Every manufacturer will
> promote his products as supporting it. Every manager will pay lip
> service to it. Every programmer will practice it (differently). And
> know will know just what it is."
>
> Any comments??????