Re: Is relational theory irrelevant?

"Paul Vernon" <paul.vernon_at_ukk.ibmm.comm> wrote in message news:bq21ut$1l8m$1_at_gazette.almaden.ibm.com...
> "Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_golden.net> wrote in message
> news:AOWdncwv5ZOSeiaiRVn-hA_at_golden.net...
> > D nests relational expressions within variable operations
>
> > and nests variable operations within variable operations.
>
> You mean D's multiple assignment statement? That is the only variable op
> that contains other variable ops that I can think of.

Think of the THE_ operators.

> > It does not, and should not, nest
> > variable operations within value operations.
>
> Not that "nesting variable ops within variable ops" is a good idea either.

I disagree here. I think it is an excellent idea because it allows one to express assignments closer to the level of intent.

> > Value operations with
> > side-effects is a really, really, really bad idea.
>
> It's only the nesting that makes them a really bad idea. Returning single
> values from single (un-nestable) variable operations is a very good idea.

I disagree. I prefer languages that make a very clear distinction between value operations and variable operations. Received on Wed Nov 26 2003 - 09:42:43 CST