Signal to Noise Ration on DBDebunk Declining
From: Marshall Spight <mspight_at_dnai.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 17:49:15 GMT
Message-ID: <vkOjd.481236$mD.169701_at_attbi_s02>
Has anyone else noticed the signal to noise ration on dbdebunk.com declining over time? I used to think those guys were the coolest, but I'm disenchanted lately. They don't have as much substance as they seem to. Ex.: they're always going on and on about being formal and precise, but they don't in fact use any formal methods whatsoever. The closest they get is the BNF in TTM, but apparently that's never even been run through a parser generator, as it has bugs in it. Otherwise: no formal semantics, no proofs, nothing.
Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 17:49:15 GMT
Message-ID: <vkOjd.481236$mD.169701_at_attbi_s02>
Has anyone else noticed the signal to noise ration on dbdebunk.com declining over time? I used to think those guys were the coolest, but I'm disenchanted lately. They don't have as much substance as they seem to. Ex.: they're always going on and on about being formal and precise, but they don't in fact use any formal methods whatsoever. The closest they get is the BNF in TTM, but apparently that's never even been run through a parser generator, as it has bugs in it. Otherwise: no formal semantics, no proofs, nothing.
Maybe my next book should be SQL for Smarties, 3rd ed. :-) At least I never hear Mr. Celko slamming Mr. Pascal, although he certainly has just cause.
Marshall Received on Mon Nov 08 2004 - 18:49:15 CET