In article <eu3p021rfpcg4dtlnljnur015lafh1m12n_at_4ax.com>,
genew_at_ucantrade.com.NOTHERE says...
> >Isn't this a bit extreme? You seem to be saying here that lists is the
> >right way to handle ordered data, and sets (relations) is the wrong way.
> >Which means that relations almost never should be used; after all,
> >almost all my relvars contain ordered data: ordered by name, or by date,
> >or by importance, or ...
>
> Do they? Or is the data in implementation-defined order and when
> you want it you use a view that presents the data ordered by whatever
> you require?
You could definitely say that. And if I use a list, one of these orders
is now treated differently from the others---implicitly, hidden, most
likely based on physical representation. A good thing? That depends. But
see my reply to Marshall; this was mainly a misunderstanding.
--
Jon
Received on Tue Mar 07 2006 - 02:19:47 CST
