The author didn't see fit to mention that you just flip the arrows. Classes/Structs know about their children. Relations know about their parents. If you wan

The author didn't see fit to mention that you just flip the arrows. Classes/Structs know about their children. Relations know about their parents. If you want crazier m*n relationships you use an association table. Did the author just not know? Or he didn't see it worthy of dismissal? > Doing this transformation by hand is tedious and error-prone. We call this tedium "the object-relational mismatch" but it isn't really about objects or relations. It really is. > The fundamental problem is that fitting complex relationships to human vision usually requires constructing some visual hierarchy, but different tasks require different hierarchies. Yes. Different tasks require different hierarchies. One particular way of doing things should not baked into your 1970s relational model.