Charles Lamb
- 1 Agrawal, R., Gehani, N.H. ODE (Object database and environment): The Ianguage and the data model ACMSIGMOD 1989 iniernaiional Conference on Management of Data (May-June 1989). Google Scholar
Digital Library
- 2 Banciihon, F., Maier, D. Muitiianguage onbject oriented lsystems: New answers to old database problems. Future Generation Commputers H, K. Fuchi and L. Kotti, Eds., North Holland, 1988.Google Scholar
- 3 Biliris, E. Configuration management and lversioning in a CAD/ CAM data management environ-ment (An example). Prime/Com putervision interenal memo, June 1989.Google Scholar
- 4 Carey, M.j., Franklin, Mj., Livny, M. Shekita. E.I. Data cachint7 trade-offs in lclient-server DBMS architectures. In Proceedings ACM the Management of Data (1991). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 5 Cattell, R.G.G. and Skeen, j. Objec= overadons benchmark. ACM Trans. Database syst. To nbe published. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 6 Chou, H. Kim, W. Versions and chan~e nntiGrztlnn in objectoriented database system, in Pro. ceedin~s of 250~ ACM/IEEE Desie'n Automation Conference (1988). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 7 Gabriel, R.P., gourbaki, N., Devin, M., Dussud, P., Gray, D., Sexton, H. Foundation for a C++ programming environment. In Conference Proceedings of C++ At Work.{Google Scholar
- 8 Glew, A. Boxes, links and parallel trees. In Proceedigns of the April '89 Usenix Software Managemetn workshop.Google Scholar
- 9 Goldstein, I.P. and Bobrow, D. A layered approach to software desogm. Xerox PARC CSL-80-5, Dec, 1980.Google Scholar
- 10 Goldstein, I.P., Bobrow, D. An experimetal ldscription-based programming environment: Four reports. Xerox PARC CSL 81-3, mar 1981.Google Scholar
- 11 Kazar. M.L. Svnchronization and caching issues in the Andrew file system. In Usemx Con{erence Proceedings, (Dallas, Winter 1988), pp.27- 36.Google Scholar
- 12 KemDer. A. Moerkotte. G. Access Support in onject bases. In Proceedings ACM, SIGMOD Internationsl Conference on Management of Data (1990). Google ScholarDigital Library
- 13 Maier. D. Makintr database systems fast enough for CASD appliations in obiect-oriented concepts, database and lapplications. W. Kim and F. Lochovsky, Eds., Addison-Wesley, Reading. Mass. 1989. mrs. 573- 581. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 14 Maier, D., Stein, I. Development imkplementation of an onjectoriented DBMS. In Research Directions in onject-oriented Programming, B. Shrifer ane P. Wegner, Eds./, MIT press 1987 . Also in Readings in Object-Oriented Database Systems, S.B Zdonik and D. Maier, morgan Kaufmann, Eds., 1990. Google ScholarDigital Library
- 15 Shekita, E. High-oerfirnmance implementation techniques for nmextgeneration databnase systems. Computert Sciences Tech. Rep. #1026, Universtiy of WisconsinMadison, 1991.Google Scholar
- 16 Shekita. E,. Carev. M. Performance enhancement through replication in an onject-oriented DBMS. In Proceedings ACM SIGMOD International Conference on Management of Data (1990). Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- The ObjectStore database system
Recommendations
What Is Object-Oriented Programming?
The meaning of the term 'object oriented' is examined in the context of the general-purpose programming language C++. This choice is made partly to introduce C++ and partly because C++ is one of the few languages that supports data abstraction, object-...
Methodology first and language second: a way to teach object-oriented programming
OOPSLA '03: Companion of the 18th annual ACM SIGPLAN conference on Object-oriented programming, systems, languages, and applicationsC++ is a very successful object-oriented language. It is a required language for more and more students. It takes great effort and practice for these students to learn how to program in C++ and how to make object-oriented programs. One potential failure ...
A Practical Comparison of Two Object-Oriented Languages
The author compares two very different object-oriented programming languages, Flavors and C++, with respect to their merits and how design decisions in each language influence various aspects of programming. The fundamental difference between the two ...
Comments