Regardless, the ask was "Perhaps you could clarify what you were trying to say with respect to OOP?", not "Have you used (active record|ActiveRecord)?" Even if you somehow managed to not see the space, and didn't notice the capitalization, the response still doesn't logically follow.
Did you not read the comment?
I said that ActiveRecord was popularized by Ruby on Rails in 2004. I feel I was quite clear on this subject.
> Regardless, the ask was "Perhaps you could clarify what you were trying to say with respect to OOP?"
Sorry. I wrote my comment before you had revised yours. If you'd like to let me know when you're done with your revisions, I'm happy to wait.
Thanks for the random history lesson and all, but why are you bringing up ActiveRecord in the first place? The topic is OOP, not a library that is bundled with a web framework created many years ago.
Did you not even read your own comment? For a brief moment you seemed to recognize that the subject is about OOP.
Why? I enjoy and benefit from the fact that you think a software library and a theoretical concept are the same thing. Never change.
> I'm talking about OOP and not active record.
Yes. We established that in my very first comment. However, I stated that it reads like you were talking about active record, and that is why it was asked if you could clarify how it pertains to OOP, given that we know you are actually talking about OOP.
If you don't know how to clarify your message, why not just say so?