Aloha Kakuikanu wrote:
> Marshall wrote:
> > Aloha Kakuikanu wrote:
> > > Marshall wrote:
> > > > Consider named views of binary operations on relations.
> > > >
> > > > Given a relational operator "op" and relation variables A and B,
> > > > and a declaration of:
> > > >
> > > > r = A op B
> > > >
> > > > the language evaluates the expression "A op B" and assigns the
> > > > result to r.
> > > >
> > > > However, if we declare this as a view, ...
> > >
> > > View is a named expression. r is a view.
> >
> > Is it necessarily named? Might we find use for an anonymous view?
>
> Well, the point is that the term "view" is redundant and SQL-ish.
> Relations and relational expressions are the fundamental concepts, and
> view is some bastardized idea.
I agree. I would go one step further to deal with Marshall's question
not use the term *view* at all. As I have said, anything related to
SQL is one way or another a source of confusion when dealing with RM
issues.
Received on Sun Jul 16 2006 - 13:58:59 CDT
