Re: Storing data and code in a Db with LISP-like interface
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 16:05:28 GMT
Message-ID: <clq5g.1433$A26.38865_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>
> The RM is a practical application of set theory. Is set theory
> good for some kinds of data but not others? Set theory
> is foundational. The analogy to what you are saying ("good
> for some things, not for others") would be like saying that
> some parts of a house need a foundation, but not others.
>
> What kinds of data can't you put in sets?
Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 16:05:28 GMT
Message-ID: <clq5g.1433$A26.38865_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
Marshall Spight wrote:
>>Marshall Spight wrote: >> >>>And anyway, I wouldn't say the RM is the best tool for >>>*everything.* Just the best tool for data management. >> >>Only certain kinds of data, it's not very good for: temporal, spatial, >>logic, oo, multimedia, unstructured and document libraries, ... but yes >>it has some strengths too.
>
> The RM is a practical application of set theory. Is set theory
> good for some kinds of data but not others? Set theory
> is foundational. The analogy to what you are saying ("good
> for some things, not for others") would be like saying that
> some parts of a house need a foundation, but not others.
>
> What kinds of data can't you put in sets?
The RM is also a practical application of predicate logic. What kinds of data can't one make logical statements about? Received on Mon May 01 2006 - 18:05:28 CEST