Re: views of binary operations

erk wrote:
> Cimode wrote:
> >
> > As stated previously, I am not convinced that r = A op B can not
> > logically lead to view(r) = A op B because it supposes r = view(r)
> > which is a shorcut leading to an absurdity which is that a relation is
> > the same as a view defined on the relation. OTOH view(r) = view(A op
> > B) would be acceptable.
>
> I agree, but I don't think Marshall was saying that. I think part of
> the confusion is that r and view(r) are different types entirely;
> view(r) is not a view OF r, but simply a different variable r that
> happens to be a view. It would probably have been better to call it v
> to avoid the confusion.
>
> Marshall, am I mistaken in the above?

No, that sound right.

There are a few reasons why the question might be interesting:

0) Behavior of views with regards to evaluation strategies (i.e., parameter passing.
1) Views as first-class entities.
(which in part requires)
2) anonymous views.

Marshall Received on Tue Jul 18 2006 - 00:14:17 CDT