# Re: Pizza Example

Date: 20 Apr 2004 09:59:48 -0700

Message-ID: <c0e3f26e.0404200859.444468bb_at_posting.google.com>

"Anthony W. Youngman" <wol_at_thewolery.demon.co.uk> wrote in message news:<0IV6pcCYeDhAFwEv_at_thewolery.demon.co.uk>...

> In message <2HQgc.9747$gG5.9105_at_newssvr31.news.prodigy.com>, Eric Kaun

*> <ekaun_at_yahoo.com> writes
**> >You have separate notation for values, sub-values, sub-sub-values, ...
**> >sub^N-values, whatever N is (once I heard 3, once I heard 6).
**> >
**> Well, yes, the fact that in relational N is only ever 2 makes life
**> simple. But that's a "cosmological constant" which upsets purist
**> physicists. If I can solve a problem for N where N is any number, it's a
**> far better solution than if it only works for "N=2" :-) (and actually,
**> both the values you've quoted for N I've met in practice :-)
*

It only upsets purist physicists who are seriously confused. The fact is that relational has a single notation that works for all data (all possible values of N if you like), whereas Pick has N different notations where N is finite (3, 6, whatever) and so adds complexity without adding power. Received on Tue Apr 20 2004 - 18:59:48 CEST