Re: A good book
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2006 12:22:19 GMT
Message-ID: <%rNrg.7789$pu3.174558_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>
> Okay, just this once more. <sigh>
>
> Yes, predicate calculus is used as a tool for proving things. It does,
> indeed, appear promising that a data management language based on it
> *might* be more amenable to such proofs... but it's certainly not
> obvious enough to warrant assumption without any kind of understanding
> of the specific ways in which this is true; much less to muddle the
> vocabulary until it appears that there is no distinction, as you've done
> above. I presume if you had anything to really say on the matter, you
> would have said it by now; so I'm off to other sources.
Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2006 12:22:19 GMT
Message-ID: <%rNrg.7789$pu3.174558_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
Chris Smith wrote:
> Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>>What's particularly astounding about his repeat of the question is >>predicate calculus is exactly the tool one uses to prove correctness of >>program transformations. When using the RM, it is up to the 'programmer' >>to deliver the proof, and it is up to the dbms to deliver the program.
>
> Okay, just this once more. <sigh>
>
> Yes, predicate calculus is used as a tool for proving things. It does,
> indeed, appear promising that a data management language based on it
> *might* be more amenable to such proofs... but it's certainly not
> obvious enough to warrant assumption without any kind of understanding
> of the specific ways in which this is true; much less to muddle the
> vocabulary until it appears that there is no distinction, as you've done
> above. I presume if you had anything to really say on the matter, you
> would have said it by now; so I'm off to other sources.
Brevity does not equate to 'nothing to say'. What can I say? You are an idiot. Plonk. Received on Sat Jul 08 2006 - 14:22:19 CEST