Re: Argument for 1NF by counter-example

From: Tony Andrews <andrewst_at_onetel.com>
Date: 26 Oct 2004 02:22:06 -0700
Message-ID: <1098782526.779433.57130_at_z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com>


Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> >> You said this: "Almost everything Pascal says is drivel.
QED."
> >> That is a statement about Pascal.
> >>
> >> A restraction would be nice. An apology would be even
better.

This argument has managed to go on for half a dozen posts without either (a) Gene realising that Laconic2's "drivel" remark was an ironic re-use of Robert's "drivel" in post #4, or (b) Laconic2 explaining that to Gene.

Can we move on now? Received on Tue Oct 26 2004 - 11:22:06 CEST

Original text of this message