Advertisement

Designing Linguistic Interfaces to an Object Database or What do C++, SQL, and Hell have in Common

  • T. Andrews
Conference paper
Part of the Workshops in Computing book series (WORKSHOPS COMP.)

Abstract

I was asked to address a few interesting issues in this talk from the perspective of a practitioner making commercial products. What type of DBPL would you create if you could have anything? What did you create? What are some of your experiences in dealing with C++ and SQL as “de fact” standard languages for OOPL and database query? The joke in the title is one that has circulated amongst the technical community I’ve been in for years. It points out that “industry” seems to make the worst possible choices from a technical view: many would argue that the dominant relational and object products are not the most technically superior, and SQL became the dominant language in the relational database world, despite many clearly better ideas: Quel and E-Quel from Ingres, the Relational Model book produced by Michael Brodie et al, and so forth. Now SQL is the standard database interface even if your database is not relational!

Keywords

Object Database Dominant Language Member Function Commercial World Declarative Semantic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    Kay, Alan C. The Early History of Smalltalk. in Proceedings of the History of Programming Languages, ACM, New York, N.Y. 1992.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • T. Andrews
    • 1
  1. 1.Ontos Corp.BurlingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations