Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> comp.databases.theory -> Re: Storing data and code in a Db with LISP-like interface

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

From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 22 Apr 2006 18:46:57 GMT
Message-ID: <BSu2g.64290$VV4.1208311@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>


Nick Malik [Microsoft] wrote:

> "Mikito Harakiri" <mikharakiri_nospaum_at_yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1145635106.226915.317380_at_e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>

>>Alvin  Ryder wrote:
>>
>>>In addition to RM like representations they [prolog and lisp] can also 
>>>represent
>>>knowledge for rule based expert systems, frame based reasoning, case
>>>based reasoning, various abstract data types, graphs, natural language
>>>grammers, machine learning ...
>>
>>Wow, a tool that excels at so many things! There must be something
>>wrong with the industry that have seen puny adoption of both.

>
> The problem, I believe, is not with the language. It is with the fact that
> it is an outgrowth of trying to solve problems that researchers find
> interesting, rather than solving problems that business and industry find
> interesting. Few systems have made the leap from one to the other.

That's really odd, because just as Sasa posted a link suggesting the strategic importance of Lisp in some spheres, I recall someone posting in a consulting forum in the early 1990's how as a prolog consultant he was able to deliver information of strategic importance to his clients.

Whether it took the computer a week to churn through everything and spit out an answer didn't matter because the answers spit out where otherwise not available at all or not available until after months or years of hindsight. Allegedly the resulting insights gave such important market-leading insights that clients happily paid him lots of money to create the prolog models and run them.

Of course, 90% of what one reads online is complete BS. But perhaps he was in the other 10%.

What I don't understand is how suggesting that introducing a much lower-level language will improve things. It seems rather like suggesting one should embed assembly language in a C# program.

That strikes me as wrong-headed. Like the suggestions we need to cripple relational dbmses to avoid impedance mismatch with much lower-level languages instead of suggesting to improve the programming languages. Received on Sat Apr 22 2006 - 13:46:57 CDT

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US