Re: Object-relational mapping tool
From: Daniel Parker (danielaparker_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 03/12/04
- Next message: Michael Mendelsohn: "Re: Dijkstra gets it wrong [was: Re: D gets it right]"
- Previous message: Isaac Gouy: "Re: dynamic type checking - a pauline conversion?"
- In reply to: Alfredo Novoa: "Re: Object-relational mapping tool"
- Next in thread: Eric Kaun: "Re: Object-relational mapping tool"
- Reply: Eric Kaun: "Re: Object-relational mapping tool"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: 12 Mar 2004 08:40:01 -0800
alfredo@ncs.es (Alfredo Novoa) wrote in message news:<e4330f45.0403120355.21bf7cbb@posting.google.com>...
>
> Languages like OQL are a complete mess and horribly complex, and they
> are not more powerful than SQL.
>
Agreed. But what does this have to do with OO-Relational mapping per
se? You are painting with such a wide brush that it is impossible to
understand your sentences. The average readers are going to conclude
from your posts that you lack the capacity to think abstractly about
the problem of binding SQL result sets to in-memory objects.
Regards,
Daniel Parker
- Next message: Michael Mendelsohn: "Re: Dijkstra gets it wrong [was: Re: D gets it right]"
- Previous message: Isaac Gouy: "Re: dynamic type checking - a pauline conversion?"
- In reply to: Alfredo Novoa: "Re: Object-relational mapping tool"
- Next in thread: Eric Kaun: "Re: Object-relational mapping tool"
- Reply: Eric Kaun: "Re: Object-relational mapping tool"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|