Re: So what's null then if it's not nothing?

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 16:17:53 +0100, Alexandr Savinov <spam_at_conceptoriented.com> wrote:

>Gene Wirchenko schrieb:
>> On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 16:47:53 +0100, Alexandr Savinov
>> <spam_at_conceptoriented.com> wrote:

>>>JOG schrieb:
>>>
>>>>Alexandr Savinov wrote:

>>>>>What people cannot understand is that we cannot simply disable nulls. It
>>>>>is too simplistic point of view. It is not possible to say that we will
>>>>>not use nulls and that is all. Why? Because the notion of absence exists
>>>>>in almost any data model. We need to know if an object exists or not. If
>>>>>yes, then we get some value. If not then we get null.

>> No, if not, we get another value.
>
>No, it is not a value - it is an absence of value. Ok, if you like to
>refer to absence of thing as thing then why not. But I find it somehow

     I was not referring to NULL when I stated "another value".

     Does an object exist? If it does, we get the answer yes. If it does not, we get the answer no. No NULL is needed.

[snip]

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko Received on Fri Nov 18 2005 - 20:02:09 CET