> On 9 Apr 2018, at 21:25, Richard Wright via 4D_Tech <4d_tech@lists.4d.com> 
> wrote:
> 
> I’ll be interested in learning how this differs from Views, not necessarily 
> 4D’s rather simplistic implementation, but something like Oracle’s, along 
> with their very powerful SQL implementation.


Hi Richard -

Isn’t the difference that 4D’s object model is seamless ? It extends from the 
language and continues into to structure and database engine in a way that SQL 
based technologies can only emulate. (i.e. you always have a discontinuity at 
some point where the SQL query has to “wrapped” to create the illusion of an 
active data object).

This is consistent with 4D’s legacy approach (which IMO was also a generation 
downstream from SQL) where we are able to use data structure objects directly 
in the language without having to “map” them to text-based query statements 
that we just cross our fingers and “hope” the DBMS understands.

Peter
**********************************************************************
4D Internet Users Group (4D iNUG)
FAQ:  http://lists.4d.com/faqnug.html
Archive:  http://lists.4d.com/archives.html
Options: https://lists.4d.com/mailman/options/4d_tech
Unsub:  mailto:4d_tech-unsubscr...@lists.4d.com
**********************************************************************

Reply via email to