Two-valued logic
From: Dawn M. Wolthuis <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 17:32:40 -0600
Message-ID: <bsnp6q$fdn$1_at_news.netins.net>
I work with a model that uses a two-valued logic. A NULL value under this scenario can be handled logically as a null set value. With this model, a NULL then = a NULL because a null set equals a null set..
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2003 17:32:40 -0600
Message-ID: <bsnp6q$fdn$1_at_news.netins.net>
I work with a model that uses a two-valued logic. A NULL value under this scenario can be handled logically as a null set value. With this model, a NULL then = a NULL because a null set equals a null set..
My impression from reading Date and others is that the three-valued logic of SQL that is proliferated in RDBMS's does not have a lot of fans. However, I don't know if that is really the case or if I just happen to be reading the pro-two-valued logic folks.
Who is out there that will still defend three-valued logic within databases and suggest that it is a better strategy than using a two-valued approach? Would it be accurate to state that most database theorists agree that a two-valued logic provides significant benefits?
And, again, thanks in advance for your help. --dawn Received on Mon Dec 29 2003 - 00:32:40 CET