> And isn't the kind of information you refer to as objects ultimately stird on
> disk in a database, called from there and stored there again once it has been
> interrogated or manipulated?
Forgot to respond to the above. Yes, most objects of interest in a genealogical program
will be stored in a database. Issues boil down to the format of the data in a persistent
database versus the format of an object in a running computer program. When going
in either direction a transformation must occur. In a relational database, the on-disk
format are all in "tables" and there may be many tables involved in storing the information
about a single person (the names will be in one table, the birth info in another, the source
in another, and so on and so on and so on). To bring a person into a program's memory
so it can be computed with, database access code must be written to read all those
tables and to construct an internal objects out of the information found in all those tables.
In most non-sql databases, the objects are not stored in tables but in structures that
can exactly mimic the structure that the objects should have when being processed
in a program. Moving objects to and from one of these databases is trivial as no
transformations are required. This is definitely the trend into the future.