Re: OO versus RDB

On 17 Jun 2006 19:51:27 -0700, David Barrett-Lennard wrote:

I find it difficult to respond! Despite all that youv'e said I don't
really understand your concerns with my original post. There seems to
be a lot of generic statements using ill defined terms. ie a lot of
hand waving! I can neither agree nor diasagree with what you are
saying. Rather I keep on asking myself: what point are you trying to
make? Can you please say something more specific - perhaps using a
real example?

Hmm, how could it come to any example when a methodology [of comparison] is
in question?

Your point was: RM has simple transparent semantics? [Is it right?]

My objection/question was: so what? What makes this [any] semantics good
for solving problems? [hint: you have to show correspondence of semantics]

(There are many semantically simple things, toothpaste, for example.)

---------
Yet real examples were given in my previous post and in a plethora of
earlier discussions on this silly topic. I can provide you with a long list
of cases where RM does not suit, as a paradigm of software construction. In
the areas of my interest it fails ignominiously:

1. Compiler construction
2. Pattern recognition
3. Image processing
4. Machine learning
5. Middleware technology
6. Distributed / concurrent systems
7. Real-time / embedded systems
8. Operating systems
9. Reusable components

Nobody would even try...

Trivial show cases of some problems from above were also presented many
times:

A. Parser
B. Power set
C. Nearest neighbour search (better than O(n))
D. Layered network protocol (OSI)
E. Dining philosophers

--------------
N.B. Again, it is not against relational algebra. It is about its place [in
a container library].

--
Regards,
Dmitry A. Kazakov
http://www.dmitry-kazakov.de
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OO versus RDB
    ... really understand your concerns with my original post. ... how could it come to any example when a methodology is ... you have to show correspondence of semantics] ... I'm neither saying OO is always best nor RM is always best. ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: OO versus RDB
    ... really understand your concerns with my original post. ... be a lot of generic statements using ill defined terms. ... how could it come to any example when a methodology is ... you have to show correspondence of semantics] ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: OO versus RDB
    ... really understand your concerns with my original post. ... be a lot of generic statements using ill defined terms. ... RM has simple transparent semantics? ... My criterion is: OO should limit itself to things that "are what they ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: One under
    ... >The original post was a thoughtful contribution about an upsetting ... and all the respondents seem able to do is bitch about ... >semantics, when the meaning was perfectly clear all along ...
    (uk.transport.london)