Gaetano Mendola wrote:
Tom Lane wrote:
Gaetano Mendola [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think a warning is missing if I create a table without OIDS that
inherits from a table with oids:
don't you think a warning shall to be raised here ?
Nope ... this is not different from the behavior for merging
Gaetano,
I've been using C++ for 15 years and Java for 7. I like them both. Every
language has its pros and cons. C++ can be extremely powerful in the hands
of someone who knows how to use it.
I actually wrote the first version of Pl/Java in C++. However, I got strong
advice to rewrite it using
Thomas Hallgren wrote:
Greg,
You don't like Java/C#. I do.
What appear here is that you hate C++.
I'm a C++ developer since long time now, and I can not use JAVA and or C#
just for a couple of reason:
1) Java was supposed to be platform compatible: in thereality is not really true.
2) I can not
Hello,
You all are behind... Python is king.
Sincerely,
Joshua D. Drake
Gaetano Mendola wrote:
Thomas Hallgren wrote:
Greg,
You don't like Java/C#. I do.
What appear here is that you hate C++.
I'm a C++ developer since long time now, and I can not use JAVA and or C#
just for a couple of reason:
Joshua D. Drake wrote:
Hello,
You all are behind... Python is king.
Just to throw more fuel on the fire. Relvar inheritance is,
according to Chris Date, one of the two Great Blunders in database
engineering over the past twenty years.
Multiple Domain Inheritance: Yes
Relation Variable
Thomas Hallgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
From an OO semantics point of view, I still regard Java and C# much more
elaborate than both C++ and Common Lisp. The latter lacks interfaces and
different levels of protection.
It doesn't lack interfaces. It has actual multiple inheritance. Which is
Greg Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thomas Hallgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
From an OO semantics point of view, I still regard Java and C# much more
elaborate than both C++ and Common Lisp. The latter lacks interfaces and
different levels of protection.
Greg,
You don't like Java/C#. I do. There's not much point arguing about it.
You feel that abstract classes are equivalent to interfaces provided you
have multiple inheritance, I don't since I'm in favor of a totally clean
interface/implementation separation.
Now you bring in the Java security
Gaetano Mendola [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Tom Lane wrote:
Gaetano Mendola [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think a warning is missing if I create a table without OIDS that
inherits from a table with oids:
don't you think a warning shall to be raised here ?
Nope ... this is not
Gaetano Mendola wrote:
Thomas Hallgren wrote:
Speaking in generic OO terms, using inheritance, you cannot remove
attributes that are present in the generalisation. If B inherits A, an
instance of B is per definition also an instance of A. Thus, you must
alwasy
be able to cast a B into an A. In
Thomas Hallgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Try to use a similar construct in a more elaborate OO-language (like Java, C#,
etc.) and you will get an error like:
Just as a point of reference, Java and C# are not more elaborate object
systems. For Java at least being *less* elaborate was an
Greg Stark [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Thomas Hallgren [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Try to use a similar construct in a more elaborate OO-language (like
Java, C#,
etc.) and you will get an error like:
Just as a point of reference, Java and C# are not more
Gaetano Mendola [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think a warning is missing if I create a table without OIDS that
inherits from a table with oids:
don't you think a warning shall to be raised here ?
Nope ... this is not different from the behavior for merging duplicate
column definitions. You get
Tom Lane wrote:
Gaetano Mendola [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think a warning is missing if I create a table without OIDS that
inherits from a table with oids:
don't you think a warning shall to be raised here ?
Nope ... this is not different from the behavior for merging duplicate
column
14 matches
Mail list logo
