Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!cimshop!davidm From: cimshop!davidm@uunet.UU.NET (David S. Masterson) Newsgroups: comp.object Subject: Re: Objective C -> Database Message-ID: Date: 16 Jan 90 03:18:11 GMT References: <684@kubix.kub.nl> <2687@tukki.jyu.fi> Sender: davidm@cimshop.UUCP Organization: Consilium Inc., Mountain View, California. Lines: 29 In-reply-to: sakkinen@tukki.jyu.fi's message of 14 Jan 90 15:20:24 GMT In article <2687@tukki.jyu.fi> sakkinen@tukki.jyu.fi (Markku Sakkinen) writes: In article <684@kubix.kub.nl> hansw@kub.nl (Hans Weigand) writes: - -Does anybody know about efforts to write a compiler that maps an -object-oriented language (in particular, Objective C) to some -relational database language (e.g, SYBASE SQL/DML). All pointers -are welcome. Sounds unfeasible. For instance, I suppose relational database languages are just too weak (not Turing-complete). Also, their "perspective" is so very different from that of OO languages. I think that depends on the definition of "object" that you choose to model via the database system. True, relational database systems can't model everything that OO languages (like Objective-C) can. Relational database languages are built on the principal of set manipulation whereas OO languages have more general capabilities. However, a relational database system (especially one with enbedded procedures like Sybase) should be able to provide significant capabilities when talking about persistent objects. Therefore, one might choose a proper subset of the OO language to model with a relational language, but not the whole thing. -- =================================================================== David Masterson Consilium, Inc. uunet!cimshop!davidm Mt. View, CA 94043 =================================================================== "If someone thinks they know what I said, then I didn't say it!"