Re: Storing data and code in a Db with LISP-like interface
Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2006 23:29:33 +0200
Message-ID: <4453dab2$0$31650$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
Neo wrote:
> ...I don't dismiss, I demonstrate with examples :) Take from the results
> what you will.
>
>>> nested linked list as the fundamental data structure
>
>>Maybe under the hood it is. If so, this is a quite >>well hidden prolog implementation detail. >>Trees and other graphs are handled easily in prolog.
>
> It isn't a matter of how well the underlying data structure is hidden.
> It is a matter of what the underlying data structure will allow one to
> represent in a general/flexible/systematic manner.
The underlying stuff is all bits. I am glad I don't have to deal with them directly.
>>> using non-data independent references >> >>What do you mean?
>
> Have a conversation with Bob Badour or see Date's books.
Bob, anything to say about prologs data-dependence? (Maybe I made it to Bobs killfile - dunno). I have read some of Date's books.
Kidding aside - it's a strange statement about a system with code-data equivalence.
>>>lack of complete normalization [of things represented] >> >>What do you mean?
>
> Exactly what it says :)
It doesn't make sense.
>>>inability to use functions (not function outputs) as parameters, meta-data >> >>This is simply not true.
>
>
> I could be wrong, so please demonstate the following in Prolog:
>
> like (john, mary).
> hate (john, bob)
> opposite (like, hate)
Without further requirements you just need to put some periods at the appropriate spots.
>>Hmm. Not much left of this list. Care to elaborate?
>
> :)
>
>>>Some of these cannot be realized in a static example >>>but rather by observing how a methodology's steps to >>>implement the next set of requirements are affected. >>>Consistency/systamaticness in meeting progressive >>>requirements become more of an issue in AI type apps >>>(ie an andriod) which would continually face changing requirements.
Changing, yes. Yet they need to be clear.
>>It is important to find a good way of stating requirements. >>Up to now I don't think you have found it.
>
> :) You are expecting a static requirement.
No.
> My requirement is how to
> best meet dynamic requirements (ie like those of an andriod).
Yes. So I'll repeat:
It is important to find a good way of stating requirements.
Up to now I don't think you have found it.
Received on Sat Apr 29 2006 - 23:29:33 CEST