Re: OO versus RDB

Adrian Hey wrote:
> Marshall wrote:
> > What I said is true: a function that doesn't read any
> > external variables but does write to them will have its
> > return value entirely determined by its parameters.
>
> What's wrong about this statement is that such things are not functions.
> If you want to substitute another word (like "procedure") that would be
> fine.

You seem quite concerned about words. Do you have anything of substance to contribute, or are you just all about the dictionary?

> > This is just arguing about what the definition of the term "pure" ought
> > to be. Not very interesting.
>
> Perhaps you'd find it a little more interesting if it was your job to
> write an optimising compiler that doesn't break programs.

What my job is has no bearing on whether arguments about which definition of a term is right are interesting or not. Such arguments are always uninteresting. It is the semantics behind them that are interesting. I keep focusing on the semantics and you keep arguing about the defintions. So far you have not said anything of interest. Although you have amply demonstrated my earlier point, which is that people get unbalanced when you point out that return values are not affected by writing to global variabes.

Marshall Received on Sun Jul 09 2006 - 18:42:22 CEST