Re: relations aren't types?
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 09:44:45 -0800
"Marshall Spight" <mspight_at_dnai.com> wrote in message <news:y8_Gb.205873$_M.909925_at_attbi_s54>...
> cases as identical? I don't see any advantage to distinguishing between
> the two cases. (Maybe there is an implementation advantage.)
Perhaps if x and y have interdependent integrity rules, such as they must have the same sign or the point must be within a certain distance of (0, 0) or whatever. Such rules might be clearer with an encapsulated data type instead of leaving them up to rules on the tuples.
-- Joe Foster <mailto:jlfoster%40znet.com> Sign the Check! <http://www.xenu.net/> WARNING: I cannot be held responsible for the above They're coming to because my cats have apparently learned to type. take me away, ha ha!Received on Fri Dec 26 2003 - 18:44:45 CET