Re: Date's First Great Blunder
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2004 18:50:20 +0100
In message <5qSdnXxhdvY1SB7dRVn-jw_at_comcast.com>, Laconic2
>> I care naught for code size. In the 80's when I had COBOL programmers
>> working for me (and was one myself),
>If you managed COBOL programmers in the 1980s, but never heard of the
>hierarchical or network data models, except as "marketing for the relational
>model", then you have led a sheltered existence, indeed.
>Ever hear of IMS? It was built on the hierarchical model of data. Ever
>hear of IDMS (not IDMS/R)? It was built on the network model of data.
>These are just two examples. Any COBOL shop that had some exposure to the
>prerelational COBOL/DBMS world had some exposure to one of these models of
Dawn didn't say she'd never heard of such databases (as you imply). She said she'd never heard them CALLED such things, other than by the proponents of relational.
There's something that a fundie eco-greenie would call an "environment wrecker". To say I've never heard of such a thing would be untrue, I just know it by a different name, a "4x4". Which you have probably never heard of either, as you probably call it an "SUV".
-- Anthony W. Youngman - wol at thewolery dot demon dot co dot uk HEX wondered how much he should tell the Wizards. He felt it would not be a good idea to burden them with too much input. Hex always thought of his reports as Lies-to-People. The Science of Discworld : (c) Terry Pratchett 1999Received on Wed Apr 21 2004 - 19:50:20 CEST