Re: A database theory resource - ideas

On Mar 20, 2:18 pm, "Marshall" <marshall.spi..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
> And in fact a standardized low-level language is something
> that it is useful to have. Lots of compilers to higher-level
> languages have gotten off the ground by generating C
> code which could then be compiled for multiple platforms,
> for example.
>

C code back ends ... weenies ... O-code, dammit ;)

> Yes, the fanatical rear-guard. (Thanks JOG.)
>

But, but, but ... how "rear" was rear (and how "low" was "low"), given that you're expected to bolt bits of C into lex lexers and yacc parsers ? The lines got blurry fairly quickly.

> An officemate says he likes to tweak C fans by calling it a
> low-level language, which of course it is. "No, it's high level"
> they say. Then he opens K&R to the intro where it says
> "C is a low-level language." Heh heh heh.
>

C "fans" ?? In this day and age ? Nurse, the screens !

It could be worse, they could be Java fans. Overheard in the office today, when a Java-head was being advised to put some logic in database procedures ... "but that's not portable ... you might want to change your database ... " (thinks: sure, I'm going to change out a $200,000 per year asset on a whim - and even if I did, your application would be by far the least of my worries) "... business logic should be in a Java layer ..." (thinks: grrrrr...) "... can I put a wrapper around it ?" (thinks: no you bl**dy can't). Do colleges have some sort of hypnosis kit where they feed this trash into them ? This is the third of the production line kits that have appeared in the office coming out with this stuff...

We've come a long way from JOG's database theory resource. I suppose the above anecdote shows just why it's a good idea. Can we have a slogan ? Something like :

"Applications are for Christmas. Databases are for life."

Sorry - it's been a bad day :( Received on Wed Mar 21 2007 - 02:48:49 CET