Re: Object-relational impedence
From: Marshall <marshall.spight_at_gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 11:08:14 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <61c85180-33fc-4cbb-b849-b60f39f4e193_at_i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 11:08:14 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <61c85180-33fc-4cbb-b849-b60f39f4e193_at_i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
On Mar 10, 9:55 am, "David Cressey" <cresse..._at_verizon.net> wrote:
> "Marshall" <marshall.spi..._at_gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> > Rather, I don't see where the assignment comes in. Particularly
> > in discussing SQL, which, strictly speaking, lacks assignment.
> > (Although it does have other imperative operators, yes.) And
> > Mr. Perryman's example was written in a single-assignment,
> > mathematical style.
>
> Oh?
>
> I thought that the SET clause of the UPDATE statement was an assignment in
> disguise.
Roughly speaking, sure. Another way to say approximately what you just
said
would be to say "[SQL] does have other imperative operators, yes." :-)
Marshall Received on Mon Mar 10 2008 - 19:08:14 CET