Re: Value (was: Mixing OO and DB)
From: Yagotta B. Kidding <ybk_at_mymail.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 01:03:38 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <Xns9A52C1F46A80Fvdghher_at_194.177.96.26>
> 320d26a_at_e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
>
> Those that don't include such representations, of course. :-)
>
Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 01:03:38 +0100 (CET)
Message-ID: <Xns9A52C1F46A80Fvdghher_at_194.177.96.26>
Jan Hidders <hidders_at_gmail.com> wrote in news:42d7d4ee-0a07-4070-81a1-002b25f303ae_at_i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
> On 28 feb, 17:47, "Yagotta B. Kidding" <y..._at_mymail.com> wrote:
>> Jan Hidders <hidd..._at_gmail.com> wrote >> innews:2d8e2a19-1dd3-49ed-89d3-5c2d9
> 320d26a_at_e23g2000prf.googlegroups.com:
>> >> But what is essential for value types in the context of database >> >> > theory is that the elements of the sets have representations >> > associated with them, i.e., ways in which they can be represented >> > in a computer or to a human being. That IMNSHO is the defining >> > characteristic of a value data type vs. other data types, and >> > thereby also defines what is and is not a value. >> >> What are other abstract data types that are not values in the context >> of database theory?
>
> Those that don't include such representations, of course. :-)
>
'I know what they are, but I won't tell you'!
Nice answer. Much appreciated, thank very much. Received on Fri Feb 29 2008 - 01:03:38 CET