Re: pro- foreign key propaganda?
Date: Sat, 24 May 2008 23:44:01 -0700 (PDT)
On May 24, 9:58 pm, "Brian Selzer" <br..._at_selzer-software.com> wrote:
> "paul c" <toledoby..._at_ac.ooyah> wrote in message
> > Brian Selzer wrote:
> >> "paul c" <toledoby..._at_ac.ooyah> wrote in message
> >>> Brian Selzer wrote:
> >>> ... And by the way, I suggest you read Codd's book.
> >>>> Pages 89-90 describe the Update operator and the justification for it.
> >>>> ...
> >>>> I could cite other instances, but I think these sufficiently show that
> >>>> you're interpretation of Codd's use of the word 'update' is faulty.
> >>>> ...
> >>> That is a rather legalistic opinion of an informal, conversational
> >>> sentence. Clearly, he is talking about an operator, not just a word.
> >>> That aside, his intentions on this topic have often perplexed me.
> >> Unless and until you agree that
> >> (1) a database value is a snapshot of the micro-world that the database
> >> is supposed to model,
> > ...
> > bs, so is the rest. a modern digital camera would do better than a
> > digital computer ever could.
> Are you really that thick, or are you just having fun at my expense? I'm
> not really in the mood to be the butt of your little joke.
Surely you must be aware by now that your position with regard to identity is a minority opinion, yes? I mean, regardless of whether it is right or wrong, you do know it's not a widely held view. (At least here in c.d.t. I imagine you'd get a different reception from a different crowd.) Right?
Marshall Received on Sun May 25 2008 - 08:44:01 CEST