From: | ocie(at)paracel(dot)com |
---|---|
To: | djackson(at)cpsgroup(dot)com (Jackson, DeJuan) |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org, pgsql-questions(at)postgreSQL(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] RE: [QUESTIONS] The Complete and Ccomprehensive list of Newbie qu |
Date: | 1998-03-17 01:58:56 |
Message-ID: | 9803170158.AA01851@dolomite.paracel.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Jackson, DeJuan wrote:
>
> Is this possible? Or is it already being done?
>
> <a lot snipped>
> > > > How do you assign function to your objects?
> <snip>
> > I don't know if tying functions to classes has been added
> > to the TO-DO list. You may want to post to the hacker list and
> > suggest
> > it.
> >
> Access to the function would then be gained by calling them through the
> class. (i.e. select EMP.totalPeople();, or update CORPEMP set
> CORPEMP.totals = DIVEMP.totalPeople();)
> Just an OO thought. (*ahhhh* It's that concurrency/data-hiding/coupling
> thing again.)
> Then one could disallow select/update on a table but all execute on
> specific functions. I do realize that this can be accomplished through
> triggers, but this has other potentials...
Looks sort of like our procedural language, except that instead of
having a "pool" of functions, functions can be "member functions" of a
class. In order to do this "all the way", it seems like we will need
all instances to appear in their parent classes -- Select
people.average_age() should hit all instances of people, even those
that have been subclassed into teachers, police, lawyers, etc.
Ocie Mitchell
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jackson, DeJuan | 1998-03-17 02:14:09 | RE: [HACKERS] RE: [QUESTIONS] The Complete and Ccomprehensive lis t of Newbie qu |
Previous Message | ocie | 1998-03-17 01:45:15 | Unique index using hash? |