Re: relations aren't types?

From: Marshall Spight <>
Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 17:06:14 GMT
Message-ID: <aaZHb.6009$xX.14201_at_attbi_s02>

"Bob Badour" <> wrote in message
> The point is all types are atomic.

It seems likely that we are using different definitions of the word "atomic."

Marshall Received on Mon Dec 29 2003 - 18:06:14 CET

Original text of this message