Re: OO-Inquisition
- From: topmind <topmind@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 19 Apr 2007 07:37:09 -0700
PS wrote:
"topmind" <topmind@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1176875025.212559.213490@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
PS wrote:
"coeval" <hvfrench@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1176823077.512104.46210@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I am flaggerbasted how Topmind is treated in comp.object newsgroup.
Go to a database newsgroup and tell them to use more OOP and see how they
treat you.
Last month I was allegedly a lone nutball. Now its the whole DB
group?
No, when you are in the DB groups we don't consider you a nutball.
So, insanity is relative?
And if an OO'er goes over to the DB group and bashes relational?
(Which they have a right to do IMO)
You're flip-flopping, just like your OO evidence.
-T-
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: OO-Inquisition
- From: PS
- Re: OO-Inquisition
- References:
- OO-Inquisition
- From: coeval
- Re: OO-Inquisition
- From: PS
- Re: OO-Inquisition
- From: topmind
- Re: OO-Inquisition
- From: PS
- OO-Inquisition
- Prev by Date: Re: OO Principle - reference needed
- Next by Date: Mixing Paradigms (Re: OO-Inquisition)
- Previous by thread: Re: OO-Inquisition
- Next by thread: Re: OO-Inquisition
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|