Re: ACID et al
Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2005 17:56:35 +0200
Message-ID: <dn4cbn$t6f$1_at_domitilla.aioe.org>
"paul c" <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac> wrote in message news:wfilf.56321$Gd6.48130_at_pd7tw3no...
> Somewhere I remember reading Hugh Darwen who put it in more useful way
> for me, something to the effect of "a db must have a language". For me
> that language would express some of the spirit of TTM. Whether it
> should express anything else is a problem I've been grappling with. It
> seems it must if any leverage (ie. re-inventing as few wheels as
> possible) is to be gotten out of existing environments (I'm thinking of
> typical www components such as the scripting in browsers for example).
Nowadays mices and sound/graphic cards have languages and soon even the main memory will have one (or several :-) if it doesn't have yet.
> However, a more significant problem seems to be that there is mismatch
> between the concept of a relation and the programming support in those
> existing environments. I say 'more significant' because it isn't tied
> to the technical details of one environment compared to another rather
> it is a difference at a deep conceptual level so a bad approach could
> have devasting effects on the programming simplicity or lack thereof.
What is missing is that 'logical independence' thing. Received on Tue Dec 06 2005 - 16:56:35 CET