Re: Concurrency in an RDB
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 02:03:21 GMT
Message-ID: <J1Hih.36055$cz.531491_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>> David wrote:
>>
>>> paul c wrote:
>>>
>>>> Marshall wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 20, 3:13 pm, monaro..._at_gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Marshall wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ..
>>>>
>>>>>> Is English your second language?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Wow, an insult in which you imply that I don't speak
>>>>> English very well. Isn't *that* original, and oh so relevant?
>>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hey Marshall, your anglais is satisfactaire. it's standard technique
>>>> for newsgroup/"successful" hand-wavers to challenge an irrelevant
>>>> aspect
>>>> of the questioner's manner, ie., to try to change the subject.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I have an interest in carefully analysing why people say what they
>>> say...
>>>
>>> Here are some possible motivations for why Dan posed that question...
>>>
>>> 1. Dan actually believes English is not Marshall's primary language,
>>> and the question was to be taken literally
>>>
>>> 2. Dan believes Marshall can speak English well, but thinks some of
>>> the NG readers are naive enough to read his question literally. This
>>> is a ploy to help bolster his argument by attacking Marshall's
>>> intelligence - perhaps because Dan thinks his argument isn't able to
>>> stand up on its own.
>>>
>>> 3. Dan used it as a literary device, as both an insult and to
>>> underscore what he regards as a discrepancy in Marshall's response.
>>>
>>> It seems to me that the third option is closest to the truth.
>>>
>>> You claim that the second option is in fact true. Do you stand by that
>>> claim, or do you in fact agree with me that the third option is closest
>>> and you are yourself using the analogous tactic that you "accuse" Dan
>>> of?
>>>
>>> David
>>
>> You can claim that I claim whatever you want. Doesn't make it so.
>> Here's a claim I admit - I claim that Christmas time is when lots of
>> directionless people (ie., the majority who have no substantial
>> inspiration on this topic or anything else) like to make lists of all
>> sorts. Unfortunate side-effect of the 20th century's emphasis on
>> universal so-called literacy. Suggest you send your list to the
>> local so-called newspaper.
>>
>> Here, in any season, I would rather hear an opinion, even an uninformed
>> one, on what it means to
>> Cheers,
Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 02:03:21 GMT
Message-ID: <J1Hih.36055$cz.531491_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
paul c wrote:
> paul c wrote: >
>> David wrote:
>>
>>> paul c wrote:
>>>
>>>> Marshall wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Dec 20, 3:13 pm, monaro..._at_gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Marshall wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ..
>>>>
>>>>>> Is English your second language?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Wow, an insult in which you imply that I don't speak
>>>>> English very well. Isn't *that* original, and oh so relevant?
>>>>> ...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hey Marshall, your anglais is satisfactaire. it's standard technique
>>>> for newsgroup/"successful" hand-wavers to challenge an irrelevant
>>>> aspect
>>>> of the questioner's manner, ie., to try to change the subject.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I have an interest in carefully analysing why people say what they
>>> say...
>>>
>>> Here are some possible motivations for why Dan posed that question...
>>>
>>> 1. Dan actually believes English is not Marshall's primary language,
>>> and the question was to be taken literally
>>>
>>> 2. Dan believes Marshall can speak English well, but thinks some of
>>> the NG readers are naive enough to read his question literally. This
>>> is a ploy to help bolster his argument by attacking Marshall's
>>> intelligence - perhaps because Dan thinks his argument isn't able to
>>> stand up on its own.
>>>
>>> 3. Dan used it as a literary device, as both an insult and to
>>> underscore what he regards as a discrepancy in Marshall's response.
>>>
>>> It seems to me that the third option is closest to the truth.
>>>
>>> You claim that the second option is in fact true. Do you stand by that
>>> claim, or do you in fact agree with me that the third option is closest
>>> and you are yourself using the analogous tactic that you "accuse" Dan
>>> of?
>>>
>>> David
>>
>> You can claim that I claim whatever you want. Doesn't make it so.
>> Here's a claim I admit - I claim that Christmas time is when lots of
>> directionless people (ie., the majority who have no substantial
>> inspiration on this topic or anything else) like to make lists of all
>> sorts. Unfortunate side-effect of the 20th century's emphasis on
>> universal so-called literacy. Suggest you send your list to the
>> local so-called newspaper.
>>
>> Here, in any season, I would rather hear an opinion, even an uninformed
>> one, on what it means to
>> Cheers,
> > Let me re-ask that: what does it mean to project A from a relation that > has two attributes, one A of some specified/understood type and the > other B whose type is the same as the relation (A,B).
It means the same as projecting A from a relation (A,B) where B is an integer. In the projection, B and its data type are irrelevant. Received on Fri Dec 22 2006 - 03:03:21 CET