Re: data & code
Date: Sat, 29 May 2004 12:23:41 +0200
Message-ID: <40b864a9$0$559$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
Dawn M. Wolthuis wrote:
> Leandro Guimaraens Faria Corsetti Dutra wrote
>> mAsterdam escreveu: >>>Which operators: domain implied/system defined operators only or >>>including all special purpose/user defined operators? >>All operators defined, definable or implicit, as long as they >>are valid. AFAIU. >> >>>Extensions (yuck!)? >> >>What do you mean?
>
> I think he is referring to whether when discussing a Type we are discussing
> all operations, whether delivered with a given DBMS or home-grown. The
> extensions are the features of a DBMS that permit the home-grown variety of
> operators to be defined, if I understand correctly.
Ah! Yes, indeed, this to (I forgot to mention that in my previous post).
>>>Where is 'class' in this terminology? >> >>Nowhere, why should it be? Class is just an OO missynonym for >>type AFAIK.
>
> If there were no closed-minded people, we would not understand what it is to
> be open-minded, I guess.
There is a thin line between closedmindedness and conceptual integrity. Trying to achieve conceptual integrity by trying to clearly define terms should not (by itself) be dismissed as a sign of being closed minded. Holding on to those definitions to where the whole becomes a hermetic, tautological framework does not appeal to me, but it has been used in many disciplines.
> If I ask an employee or student to write or code a class, they know what I
> mean. So, the term is useful, even if it is a synonym of some other term.
I hope they do :-) Received on Sat May 29 2004 - 12:23:41 CEST