Re: Ah, but who has better parties?

From: Gene Wirchenko <genew_at_mail.ocis.net>
Date: Fri, 14 May 2004 08:44:16 -0700
Message-ID: <mnp9a0tftp60co1p2u3shr81k98p0ph8e9_at_4ax.com>


"Dawn M. Wolthuis" <dwolt_at_tincat-group.com> wrote:

>"Eric Kaun" <ekaun_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:Vj3pc.636$kt2.578_at_newssvr33.news.prodigy.com...

[snip]

>> In that respect, Pick and MV have
>> a better argument than XML - they're far from cool. :-)
>
>You've got that right too!

     Being far from cool is a better argument? I am *inclined* to agree. XML as a database format? <FX: caff, choke>

[snip]

>Too many "selfs" involved. You are smart and I used to be ;-) and we would
>arrive at different conclusions in many cases. If it is too complex to test
>our theories, then I suspect the industry would be better served by relying
>on intuition based on experience rather than designing elegant algebras and
>then tossing an implementation into production with an assumption it will be
>a good workhorse.

     I think you have it the wrong way around. Intuitions are not provable. I would much rather have some theory behind what I am trying to do than to simply go at it with intuition "...and then tossing an implementation into production with an assumption it will be a good workhorse."

     It may not be possible to totally prove a theory, but that is a better situation than having none at all. Many people downplay the importance of theory, because they are not aware of the theories that they implicitly use, not that the theories are not there.

     I do use intuition heavily, but I do not rely on it as my only tool. I find that switching back and forth between reasoning and intuition is very useful.

[snip]

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:

     I have preferences.
     You have biases.
     He/She has prejudices.
Received on Fri May 14 2004 - 17:44:16 CEST

Original text of this message