Re: Proposal: 6NF

David Cressey wrote:
> "Cimode" <cimode_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message

>> David Cressey wrote:
>>> "Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
>>>
>>>> ... A dbms is a formal logic system ...
>>> Bullshit.
>> Without knowing it, Barking Dog Prime means that he conceives a dbms as
>> a formal logic system that should handle missing data in a
>> deterministic manner as opposed to non deterministic method incarnated
>> by SQL NULLS.  On that, he is right 100% and you are wrong.

Hmmmm - IMO SQL _is_ deterministic on handling NULLs! I suspect you are confusing the complexity arising from 3VL logic combined with the schizoid meanings applied by interpreters (like Davids suggestion - snipped) and oversimplifying the complexity (mess) as "non deterministic". If this causes offense please read it again as no slight is intended.

> I don't know how you figure out what BD1 means if he doesn't know it
> himself.

Thats easy - BB is so self assured in his Emperors outfit as a self appointed guardian of relational truth that he would never be able to assess his own persona.

> His words were bullshit, and I was careful to quote the exact part that was
> bullshit.

And worthy of being called out.

> Where I started from was that a DBMS should have a "systematic treatment of
> missing data". That doesn't necessarily imply that SQL's treatment is a
> good one, or that, if it is a good one, a better one cannot be devised. I
> prefer SQL's treatment
> to several alternatives I've seen, including the alternative of forbidding
> all missing data, and the alternative of treating NULL as a special value.

A fair assessment IMO.

[..]

>> So do me a favor, do not engage him, he is lost cause for inquisitive
>> and questionning purposes...

I wonder how long before he is left to converse with himself?

Cheers Frank. Received on Sat Oct 07 2006 - 09:09:13 CDT