Re: Ideas for World Hierarchy Example

Bob Badour wrote:
> Marshall wrote:
>
> > On Jan 12, 10:32 am, "dawn" <dawnwolth..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >>Marshall wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>Consider some other approach to data management, or
> >>>even general computation. What are its primitive operators?
> >>>Is the set provably minimal, or is there some redundancy?
> >>>What algebraic properties do they have? What useful theorems
> >>>can we derive from these properties? What is the computational
> >>>power? It is the same as first order logic, untyped lambda
> >>>calculus, what? What is the computational power of the type
> >>>system? What interesting theorems can it prove about
> >>>source code? What is the concurrency model? How does it
> >>>compare to shared-state concurrency, or transaction isolation,
> >>>or message passing concurrency? What is the constraint
> >>>system like? How does it integrate with the type system?
> >>>What constraints can be proven statically?
> >>
> >>>These questions are interesting.
> >>
> >>The questions I really find interesting are: How long did it take to
> >>write that software application? How many developers were required?
> >>How much experience did developers need and how much training? How
> >>long does it take to maintain the software in various ways? How long
> >>does it take to write another using and extending the same database?
> >>How much additional time does it take to make the software sing for the
> >>end-user compared to what is easiest to do that works, but isn't great?
> >
> > How are those questions working out for you? Have they been productive?
>
> I don't know why she would find those questions interesting. After all,
> the answers are so obvious: Compared to any other logical data model,
> using relations it will take much less time with far fewer developers,
> no training beyond basic education, much less time to maintain, much
> less time to write another or extend the same database, and almost no
> time to make the sofware sing for the end user.

Kinda makes you wonder why IBM felt a need for DB2 9 and its new features, eh? --dawn

> Since the relational
> model is the easiest, what works and is great, I don't particularly
> understand her last question, though.
Received on Sun Jan 14 2007 - 00:02:16 CET