Re: Examples of SQL anomalies?

On 5 juil, 04:26, paul c <toledoby..._at_ac.ooyah> wrote:
> To explain a little more, my point of view is that of somebody who is
> interested in the construction of systems. As much as I admire the
> efforts of D&D, for their precision, diligence and faithfulness to their
> logical principles, I've always been sceptical, for reasons I can't
> explain very well, of the practical possibilities for combining a
> language that operates on relations with one that allows type definition
> by users.
>
> I realize that unlike me, not everybody here has the RM in mind when
> they talk about values. But as far as the RM is concerned, I think it
> is only concerned with determining equality or inequality of values.
> From a practical point of view, I would prefer an engine that uses a
> relational language to operate on relations and some kind of type
> language (not one of the current OO languages) to define types. I would
> hope this would be implemented 'outboard' of a relational engine (or
> layer if you like) and use some form of early or late bind to provide
> the 'equal' or 'not equal' answers the RM needs. Am sure this must be
> extremely controversial to many who know the RM better than I do, as a
> change in software could change the facts, eg., the answers a given db
> gives!

Just as a side note, I followed your advice and stopped paying too much importance to what is said or not on this newsgroup preferring to focus on my implementation. My latest impression is that somehow this board is caught between dogmatism of the few and ignorance of the majority. The victim being exploration of new concepts and ideas. Thanks for this sound advice. Received on Sat Jul 05 2008 - 15:04:31 CEST