Re: Possible bridges between OO programming proponents and relational model
From: paul c <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac>
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 01:14:59 GMT
Message-ID: <nCnkg.36044$iF6.10516_at_pd7tw2no>
>> Cimode wrote:
>>
>>> paul c a écrit :
>>>
>>> The basic premise of this thread was to suggest that physical issues
>>> may restrict faithfull representation of relvars and asking the
>>> question on whether OO mechanisms could help ...
>>
>> If so, the thread should restrict itself to relvars and OO mechanisms
>> (e.g., inheritance).
>>
>>> ... representation through N-ary physical scheme)...If I am not
>>> mistaken a
>>> non-sequiturs involve false premice. ...
>>
>> I'd say you are mistaken, so 'not mistaken' is a false premise.
>
> Non sequitur does not require a false premise. ...
Date: Fri, 16 Jun 2006 01:14:59 GMT
Message-ID: <nCnkg.36044$iF6.10516_at_pd7tw2no>
Bob Badour wrote:
> paul c wrote: >
>> Cimode wrote:
>>
>>> paul c a écrit :
>>>
>>> The basic premise of this thread was to suggest that physical issues
>>> may restrict faithfull representation of relvars and asking the
>>> question on whether OO mechanisms could help ...
>>
>> If so, the thread should restrict itself to relvars and OO mechanisms
>> (e.g., inheritance).
>>
>>> ... representation through N-ary physical scheme)...If I am not
>>> mistaken a
>>> non-sequiturs involve false premice. ...
>>
>> I'd say you are mistaken, so 'not mistaken' is a false premise.
>
> Non sequitur does not require a false premise. ...
That's why he is mistaken.
p Received on Fri Jun 16 2006 - 03:14:59 CEST