Re: The BOOLEAN data type

bbadour_at_golden.net says...

> > And there would be precious few apps that would need this!
 

> So says you.

And I still say it.

> I have worked on applications for genetic counsellors, and they
> might disagree.

And that's fine.

Can you *_not see_* that this kind of discussion is *_completely_* irrelevant for 99.9% (probably more) of applications?

I think that I've already mentioned that I have a degree and Masters in genetics (and a very good friend in the Pasteur who studies nothing but sex-determination in humans), so I've probably forgotten more than most will ever know about genetics and intersexes and defects.

> With ever more rapid advances in medicine and in
> understanding human genetics, this sort of thing will only get more
> important.

Not for membership apps for Youth Hostel organisations or 99.99% of apps.  

> Someday, someone might have to design a data model for an application that
> accounts for chimeras as well. While rare, such people do exist.

Indeed - for genetic counsellors and medics and researchers perhaps - for Joe Sixpack - not a chance.  

> > But would call themselves "male" and look "reasonably" male and have
> > something resembling a willy and use the men's room and be able to sleep
> > in the male dorm - even if they were lacking in the willy dept., there's
> > nothing obliging people to strip off in dorms.
 

> You can make up whatever requirements you want to try to justify your bad
> design suggestion. Neither male nor female is true and HasYChromosome
> necessarily help you to assign dormitories.

This is becoming fruitless - do you or do you not accept that this sort of arcane discussion about genetic abnormalities has *_IN EFFECT_* no relevance *_WHATSOEVER_* for the vast majority of people either designing or using applications?  

> I would suggest a Dormitory domain and an AssignedDormitory attribute. That
> way, you could have as many dormitories as you need and assign them any
> number of ways.

There are male and female dorms - no more, no less.

Children under 7 may be considered either for the purposes of sleeping (if they prefer their mothers or whatever) - which is perhaps a far more realistic and real world scenario than the mutants you are talking about!

However, the children's maleness or femaleness is boolean!  

> > I am writing an application for the real world, not the far out
> > scenarios you are describing.
 

> In your real-world application, neither male nor female is true and
> HasYChromosome will not suffice for assigning dormitories.

It is and it will. If I wish to debate philosophy and/or go down the road of bringing up bizarre sideshow cases for what is a bread and butter simple app - then fine.

I can see the face of the manager of the organisation for which I'm writing the app - "Well here Mr Sixpack, you have gender - as you can see it has 15 records (what with intersexes and chimerae and whatnot!)"...

It just ain't gonna happen.

> In any case, I
> was addressing your sweeping generality regarding meaning in the real world
> and not the specific requirements of your application, which are of course
> just as meaningless to most of the real world.

You were getting bogged down in arcana.  

> > Intersexes generally resemble one or the other and are treated as such.
 

> What if the intersexed child protests?

It's given a smack in the mouth and told that "You're sleeping in Mommy's room, end of story".

> > If one wanders in off the street to join a Youth Hostel Organisation, I
> > doubt if anyone's going to ask me about any history of sexual abuse.
 

> In that case, it might be safer to arrange sleeping arrangements some other
> way.

What arrangements? Do you know anywhere (hotel, hostel, whatever) that would enquire as to its customers criminal sexual history - "Excuse me sir, have you a conviction for buggering young boys?"... you're going down the silly trail again!  

> > > What does the implication function mean for gender?

> > Eh?

> Implication has meaning as a binary operation on boolean values. What
> meaning does it have for gender if gender is a boolean value?

I may be stupid, but I still don't understand what you mean here.  

> > Indeed, which is why I asked in the first place.
 

> That wasn't what you asked in the first place--at least not the first place
> I saw. In the first place, you asked why boolean is an inappropriate domain
> for gender. You don't seem particularly willing to accept the answer to the
> question, though.

I am perfectly willing so to do! I am disputing the utility of the justification for having anything more than a Boolean in any more than 0.001% of applications.

Paul...

-- 

plinehan__AT__yahoo__DOT__com

C++ Builder 5 SP1, Interbase 6.0.1.6 IBX 5.04