Re: Ping: dawn, some mvl questions
From: mAsterdam <mAsterdam_at_vrijdag.org>
Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 13:50:09 +0200
Message-ID: <44759922$0$31642$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
>
> mAsterdam wrote:
>
>
> Ah, oops, I see my words were ambiguous (as natural
> language so often can be). With "this" I was actually
> referring to
>
> mAsterdam wrote:
>
Date: Thu, 25 May 2006 13:50:09 +0200
Message-ID: <44759922$0$31642$e4fe514c_at_news.xs4all.nl>
Keith H Duggar wrote:
> Keith H Duggar wrote:
>
>>And isn't this a physical or implementation issue as >>opposed to a logical issue?
>
> mAsterdam wrote:
>
>>(The second "this" referred to "/using/ or >>/manipulation/ of a list representation".)
>
> Ah, oops, I see my words were ambiguous (as natural
> language so often can be). With "this" I was actually
> referring to
>
> mAsterdam wrote:
>
>>The drawback would be that the preservation of the >>listness is not garantueed. Whithout additional >>constraints there is no stopping anyone from inserting >>nodes which make the described graph more complex.
...which is an example of "/using/ or /manipulation/".
> In other words, isn't preservation of "listness" a physical
> or implementation issue? When I wrote using and manipulation
> (a vague sentence I should have left out I guess)
Vague? I took it as "what happens when the content changes", IOW the dynamics. Did I misinterpret it?
> I had in
> mind the /physical/ manipulation of the data. Not an
> abstract set of operations or algebra defined for them.
The content dynamics have logical and physical aspects, just like the statics. Received on Thu May 25 2006 - 13:50:09 CEST