4 ms·
It's not plainly true at all. You write as if there's a rigorous, agreed-upon notion of "object". Not so. As such, it can be as vague as you need it to be.
by bhiggins 16y ago
It's not plainly true at all. You write as if there's a rigorous, agreed-upon notion of "object". Not so. As such, it can be as vague as you need it to be.
- artsrc 16y agoNot every person agrees on every aspect of the relational model, or of the SQL implementations. There is a rigorous notion of .net object.
- bhiggins 16y agoRelational algebra is agreed upon. SQL is loosely based on it. On the other hand, there's not even a single agreed upon notion for objects. There's a rigorous notion of a .NET object but it's not compatible with Java's, C++'s, Smalltalk's, ...