Re: How to efficiently make an "history" ?

From: Todd Gillespie <toddg_at_linux128.ma.utexas.edu>
Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2001 19:24:04 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <9mm3sk$kbt$1_at_geraldo.cc.utexas.edu>

Harlan Messinger <zzzhmessinger_at_erols.com> wrote:
: "Todd Gillespie" <toddg_at_linux128.ma.utexas.edu> wrote in message

:> kesako <kesako_at_mail.com> wrote:
:> : Why are you seem allergic to the "field" word? We both seem to

: understand

:> : what it means and I don't see a possible confusion with something in

: SQL.

:>
:> Celko has made a living by being accurate.

: Where was the inaccuracy? If one says "car" instead of "automobile", is one
: being inaccurate? Accuracy doesn't demand the existence of only one term per
: concept. It also doesn't demand using the term that happens to have been
: contrived for a particular area of discussion rather than the generic one
: that existed long before.

If one says "car" instead of "automobile", and one is speaking LISP, then yes, one is being inaccurate.

Context.

I was only answering kesako's question as to why Celko avoided 'field', the answer of which is that that is Celko's habit, accuracy and throughness. I made no claim on the habit itself; I think it a tad overzealous, but that is neither here nor there.

Take it up with them. Received on Thu Aug 30 2001 - 21:24:04 CEST