Re: domains aren't subtypes, right?

From: Paul G. Brown <paul_geoffrey_brown_at_yahoo.com>
Date: 3 Jun 2003 18:27:29 -0700
Message-ID: <57da7b56.0306031727.209ae842@posting.google.com>

"Mikito Harakiri" <mikharakiri_at_ywho.com> wrote in message news:<_l5Da.3$354.166_at_news.oracle.com>...

> Ironically, my expression was coherent with your idea of favoring complex
> advanced datatypes instead of many primitive ones (one per each complex type
> component)!

Then Sir, I withdraw my challenge, and remain, etc . . .

[ snip ]

> Generally, there are superior and inferior units. For example, Metric System
> is superior to the Old Imperial System (called "standard" in the US;-). Is
> my judgement aesthetical? Mostly, because arguments riduculing complexity of
> primitive culture artifacts never scientifically based.

Well, now we're into a philosphical discussion entirely off-topic to c.d.t. (But I share your sense of taste in this instance . . . .) Received on Tue Jun 03 2003 - 20:27:29 CDT