Re: Columns without names

Bob Badour wrote:
> Marshall wrote:
>
> > Marshall wrote:
> >
> >
> > If you're going where I think you're going, then I would
> > propose that it is better *not* to think of domain
> > definitions as being relations. What works better, as
> > best I can tell, is to consider them simple sets.
>
> Oh, good catch! After you point it out, it's so obvious that if one
> starts with a relation as a set of tuples then removes all the
> tuple-ness of the elements, what's left is just a set.
>
> Why didn't I think of that?

Aye, to be honest that was exactly why I musing over columns without names - an attempt to take the tuple-ness out of the elements. Received on Mon Sep 18 2006 - 02:31:54 CEST