Re: relations aren't types?

From: Alfredo Novoa <alfredo_at_ncs.es>
Date: 2 Jan 2004 16:05:52 -0800
Message-ID: <e4330f45.0401021605.97df0ed@posting.google.com>

"Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_golden.net> wrote in message news:<r96dnY5YyOUWF2iiRVn-uQ_at_golden.net>...

> > It is not every type. There are also array types, relation types,
> > tuple types, etc, etc.
>
> Since these are types with values and operations, how exactly do they differ
> from scalar types?

They have components, or user visible components if you prefer.

Scalar types does not have components, they have representations, and each representation may have several components or not.

For instance a matrix type does not have representations, a matrix is a matrix :)

BTW IMHO the term "atomic" is confusion prone and we should avoid it.

Regards
Alfredo Received on Fri Jan 02 2004 - 18:05:52 CST