Re: sql views for denomalizing

"Marshall Spight" <marshall.spight_at_gmail.com> wrote in message news:1122961571.900054.277760_at_o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> > On 30 Jul 2005 14:46:38 -0700, "Marshall Spight"
> >
> > "That trick NEVER works!" -- Rocket J. Squirrel
>
> Heh. That was one wise squirrel.
>
>
> > >Absolutely. The only thing that'll make programmers obsolete is an
> > >artificial intelligence smart enough to write code based solely
> > >on reading the PM's requirements docs. And even that process will
> > >have to be iterative, because the PMs will say, "no, that isn't
> > >what I *meant*."
> >
> > Spec? What spec? And if specs do get written to that level of
> > detail, what is the difference between that and a programming
> > language? Some, but not a lot.
>
> Absolutely agree. If you can program in it, it's a programming
> language, even if the designers of it strenuously object to
> calling it that!
>
> It is as if some linguists got together and said, we have come up
> with a TOTALLY NEW WAY of communicating without language. We have
> developed this special techinque, where you blow breath out through
> your mouth, and engage your lips, tongue and vocal chords to modulate
> the sound. These sounds have been designated to carry meaning, but
> they are NOT WORDS, they are something completely new. Thus we can
> convey information with no equipment, and completely free of using
> words.
>

Two examples come to mind:

The whistling language of the Canary islanders, and Xhosa, which has as many clicks in it as a telegraph message. Received on Thu Aug 04 2005 - 11:11:19 CEST