Re: Examples of SQL anomalies?
Date: Sun, 06 Jul 2008 22:11:02 GMT
Message-ID: <Wpbck.56376$kx.37461_at_pd7urf3no>
Cimode wrote:
> On 2 juil, 16:56, paul c <toledoby..._at_ac.ooyah> wrote: >> -CELKO- wrote: >>>>> Once again you are introducing confusion, in this case muddying the waters with unstated design questions, confusing a system that is designed to anticipate suppliers and bills with one that isn't. <<
>>> Do you really find that a credit balance is not a common business
>>> practice? What I am pointing out is that a zero is a value on a scale
>>> and a NULL or other missing value indicators is not. Would you like
>>> to go into Codd's A and I markers?
>>> Instead of rudely ranting about illiteracy (while misspelling
>>> "tomorrow"), show us how to indicate when a $0.00 payment is a credit
>>> balance on an actual billing or a lack of a payment on a non-existent
>>> billing. The only thing that comes to mind is a flag of some kind
>>> which splits the single scalar value over two or more columns in
>>> violation of 1NF and leads to user-defined behaviors rather than
>>> guaranteed consistent behaviors.
> I strongly doubt you will get a response on this. >
As Bob B likes to point out, it's hard to respond to obfuscations and babble in general. Misreading the description of his condition as rudeness is typical of the reactions from illiterates in all subjects these days. Come to think of it, I think Joe C may himself be the personification of a primary SQL anomaly, ie., there is not much theory, if any, involved in SQL, while he likes to attach the theories of pretty much every extant CS theorist whose name he's heard of to its use, which proves that he can't read and understand what they have written either. I suppose, in North America anyway, it would be reasonable for his very name to appear somewhere among the 100 most egregious SQL anomalies (sound like a book title?). He should stick to telling people who want to use it how to distort the damn thing and stay out of theory. After all, those many people don't care about theory. Received on Mon Jul 07 2008 - 00:11:02 CEST