Re: 3 value logic. Why is SQL so special?

From: Jan Hidders <hidders_at_gmail.com>
Date: 21 Sep 2006 02:14:12 -0700
Message-ID: <1158830052.058415.118470@i3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>

Marshall wrote:

> But this is a really good point: you also give up all the theorems
> of the boolean algebra! I mean, some of them might still hold,
> but which ones? You have to check every one over again.

The ones for associativity, commutativity, absorption and distributivity still hold. The ones for complements ( P or not(P) = T, P and not(P) = F ) don't.

Jan Hidders

Received on Thu Sep 21 2006 - 04:14:12 CDT

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: JOG: "Re: Columns without names"
Previous message: Chris Smith: "Re: Idempotence and "Replication Insensitivity" are equivalent ?"
In reply to: Marshall: "Re: 3 value logic. Why is SQL so special?"
Next in thread: Volker Hetzer: "Re: 3 value logic. Why is SQL so special?"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US