[ALL] let's think about Query Language for 2.0

[Ruslan Zasukhin]

on 5/23/03 10:45 PM, Andreas Grosam at agrosam at computerworks.ch wrote:

>> Andreas,
>> 
>> I do not like OQL,
>> 
>> I do not like pure OO DBMS -- they have kill idea!  :-)
>> So now I prefer name Valentina as Object-Relational.
>> 
>> I do not like their way.
>> I want go by other way for OO database features.
> 
> "The OO DBMS and RDBMS debate will never end!"
> Actually, there are some people which state that there is no difference
> at the logical level at all. Hm. I'm not totally convinced ;)

This is not true.

Some developers few years ago have told:
    why we need C++ ?!!!
    I can do the same on C.

Or when I have say:
    what a great is C++!!! I cannot image how I could program without it.

Some developers have told:
    Hmm, easy. Exactly as before on C.

Then I say:
    Sorry guys, this means that you use C++ on C level, and simply don't
know C++.

> The trend is towards Object-Relational DBMS. I agree - sounds
> reasonable. We will need Relational Algebra - even for objects!

For Valentina Objects are based on Relational Tables.
So no big problems here.
> 
> But if somebody needs OQL ....
> 
> I state (omitting the proof) - OO and Relational DBMS can use the same
> database kernel.


>> I hope that 2.0 will introduce many good API, so everybody who want
>> will be
>> able develop e.g. OQL level for Valentina. May be even Paradigma will
>> do
>> this. But I do not like OQL :-)
> But if somebody needs OQL....  ;)))

Then over 2.0 API he will be able develop OQL.
As well as STL-based API,
Or VDK-like classes,
Or something more ?

-- 
Best regards,
Ruslan Zasukhin      [ I feel the need...the need for speed ]
-------------------------------------------------------------
e-mail: ruslan at paradigmasoft.com
web: http://www.paradigmasoft.com

To subscribe to the Valentina mail list go to:
http://lists.macserve.net/mailman/listinfo/valentina
-------------------------------------------------------------