3 ms·
"does he thinks that at least object oriented programming is more naturally understandable by developers? The question is about how they might use, say, OO DBs
by benblack 16y ago
"does he thinks that at least object oriented programming is more naturally understandable by developers? The question is about how they might use, say, OO DBs with more understanding. may we say that OO approach in programming is much less alien that map-reduce things? because if we say 'people don't understand', then they might even don't understand some other part of their programming job."
OO is not natural, in my opinion, it is simply popular for a variety of reasons way outside the scope of this interview. There is no free lunch: regardless of paradigm, the best developers have a deep understanding of what is going on inside and under their applications, where that includes things like the databases on which they depend, the networks on which they depend, etc.
- fedd 16y agothanks, may i explain why i am asking. maybe this will out of scope too, but i was interested in stories when a business-oriented person with knowledge of interpreted languages but without knowing the DB part succeeds in creating an online service, like here http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2230268 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2230268 (the parent is the story itself) so i want to think that the database tools (or particular database engines, chosen right) might help more people to succeed, while knowing the basics of things like OO, normalizations and such. OR should we leave business to businessmen and developing to geeks? (and is The Social Network movie showing a complete computer nerd get the common human psychology so right a total tale? :) )