Re: What databases have taught me

From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 01 Jul 2006 18:40:29 GMT
Message-ID: <xkzpg.4699$pu3.108771@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>

Marshall wrote:

> Bob Badour wrote:
>

>>But the point is the set of values is not the data type. The data type
>>is both the set of values and the set of operations. Making up a new
>>operation does not alter the data type because that operation was always
>>there even if never previously expressed.
>>[...]
>>And what I am saying is we don't really define anything that wasn't
>>already there and what we choose as defining operations are quite
>>arbitrary. The data type existed before we defined anything just as the
>>values exist before we ever express them.

>
> If I understand you correctly (iffy), you are saying that a data type
> is the set of value, and the set of functions on those values
> *whether those functions are reified or not.*
>
> In other words, the type integer includes the function
>
> power: int, int -> int
>
> whether it's in the standard library, or we write it ourselves
> using multiplication, or even if we couldn't actually link
> to it at all at this time.

Exactly. Received on Sat Jul 01 2006 - 13:40:29 CDT