Re: Storing data and code in a Db with LISP-like interface

> ... Not only should the function work for data entered
> prior to writing the function but also for new data
> entered after the function is written.

Below script provides a further example of the above. Suppose we want the existing verb whose name's symbol string is 'boss' to have a second name whose symbol string will be 'employer'. Will the original db, schema and user-defined function still work? See below:

// Allow existing verb whose name's symbol string is 'boss' // to have a second name whose symbol string is 'employer'. (create (and (select name instance *)

             (select * symbol 'boss')
        )
        name
        (findElseAdd name instance 'employer')

// Verify getRoot function works with boss and employer. // Both of the following display issac !!! (msgbox (getRoot boss abraham))
(msgbox (getRoot employer abraham))

One might wonder if it is necessary to model things differently from their names differently from their symbols strings differerently from their symbols. It just depends on a particular application's requirements. It would be an overkill for most applications. Received on Sat Apr 01 2006 - 22:46:05 CEST