Re: Resiliency To New Data Requirements
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 20:40:36 GMT
Message-ID: <8X5Dg.39460$pu3.519146_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>>Perhaps it would be more precise to say that they "threw the baby out
>>with the bathwater." I found arguments, but no emperical data, that
>>showed the relational model to be beneficial to those using it. If you
>>are aware of any emperical data, particularly any that shows that the
>>RM is more flexible over time than either MUMPS or PICK that predate
>>it, I would really like to see that.
>
> It doesn't exist.
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 20:40:36 GMT
Message-ID: <8X5Dg.39460$pu3.519146_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
erk wrote:
> dawn wrote: >
>>Perhaps it would be more precise to say that they "threw the baby out
>>with the bathwater." I found arguments, but no emperical data, that
>>showed the relational model to be beneficial to those using it. If you
>>are aware of any emperical data, particularly any that shows that the
>>RM is more flexible over time than either MUMPS or PICK that predate
>>it, I would really like to see that.
>
> It doesn't exist.
Bullshit! Look, if you are going to engage the ignorant cranks, at least call them on their bullshit. Don't swallow it! Received on Fri Aug 11 2006 - 22:40:36 CEST