Re: the relational model of data objects *and* program objects

"erk" <eric.kaun_at_gmail.com> wrote in message news:1113833874.524704.128900_at_o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> mountain man wrote:
>> "erk" <eric.kaun_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:1113399979.268750.316550_at_l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> > I would infer that the languages used for the program objects would
>> > benefit from relations as first-class entities.
>>
>> Such as that found within SQL?
>
> SQL does a rather poor job of it, so I wouldn't say SQL is a good
> "model."

I dont have any problems with SQL, but I am still not clear on what you mean by the expression: "benefit from relations as first-class entities" but suspect it is a formalism used in set theory and/or db theory.

>> SQL DBMS's can be made automatically optimally "relational"
>> by that application of common sense management. Codd's 12
>> Rules can be met on the ground of implementation, although
>> this may be a foreign concept to many theorists.
>
> Sure, but that says nothing about the model, nor does it say anything
> about the value of "non-relational SQL management standards," whatever
> that means, either in theory or practice.
>
>> However I do mean to redefine the scope of the "model of data"
>> such that it has the ability to encompass not just the data, but
>> also the processes associated with that data, which are already
>> being stored by modern database management systems as
>> stored procedures.
>
> If associating procedures with data is your only concern, that's been
> covered ad nauseum by ADTs, various type theories, OO, etc. What do
> they miss that you propose to add?

The programs and data are --- in a certain sense --- like ying and yang. You cannot have one "operational" without the other. You cannot have a database system (in use) without an application running on that dbms.

So I am expecting in the end, a model to reflect (and address) this issue.

We make a definition and define the term "organisational intelligence" [as related to computer systems] to be the sum of all the organisational data plus the sum of the all the organisational programs (in production use) ----- ie: SOURCE CODE. (Irrespective of the language!)

So the (evolved) model should be not for the data, but for the [computerised] "organisational intelligence".

Pete Brown
Falls Creek
Oz
www.mountainman.com.au Received on Tue Apr 19 2005 - 10:16:40 CEST