Re: relations aren't types?
From: Adrian Kubala <adrian_at_sixfingeredman.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 12:41:05 -0600
Message-ID: <slrnbu95u1.nqi.adrian_at_sixfingeredman.net>
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2003 12:41:05 -0600
Message-ID: <slrnbu95u1.nqi.adrian_at_sixfingeredman.net>
Bob Badour <bbadour_at_golden.net> schrieb:
> [...] Thus "relation" refers to values of a generic type and not to a
> specific type, per se. [...]
I understand what a relation is. If anything, I'm fuzzy on the definition of "type".
Consider the type "student" which is defined as as the set of tuples: {<"joe", "schmoe">, <"sally", "strauss">}. In what way is this not a type, or not a relation? Received on Sat Dec 20 2003 - 19:41:05 CET