Re: domains aren't subtypes, right?

On Tue, 03 Jun 2003 10:52:12 -0700, Mikito Harakiri wrote:

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

        If one accepts D&D's type sistem in TTM this question becomes moot. There would not be many primitive or complex advanced datatypes, but a hierarchy where each type has potentially multiple possible representations and an internal representation.

        And SQL's date system can hardly be called crap for having the few data types it has. It certainly is more intuitive; the internal representation it altogether another story.

-- 
 _
/ \  Leandro Guimarães Faria Corsetti Dutra     +41 (21) 648 11 34
\ /  http://br.geocities.com./lgcdutra/         +41 (78) 778 11 34
/ \  Responda à lista, não a mim diretamente!   +55 (11) 5686 2219
Rate this post if helpful: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=leandro