Re: relations aren't types?
From: Joe \ <joe_at_bftsi0.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 19:44:03 -0800
Message-ID: <1072496648.293318_at_news-1.nethere.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2003 19:44:03 -0800
Message-ID: <1072496648.293318_at_news-1.nethere.net>
"Marshall Spight" <mspight_at_dnai.com> wrote in message <news:dg1Hb.657908$HS4.4679784_at_attbi_s01>...
> "Joe "Nuke Me Xemu" Foster" <joe_at_bftsi0.UUCP> wrote in message news:1072468375.178802_at_news-1.nethere.net...
> >
> > I'm having a horrible vision of the love-child of the relational
> > model and 'dynamic' typing a la Smalltalk, Python, or VBScript...
>
> Why is it horrible?
Interoperability with programs written in static-typed languages would be a concern, as would the problem of declaring constraints.
-- Joe Foster <mailto:jlfoster%40znet.com> On the cans? <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 Sat Dec 27 2003 - 04:44:03 CET