Re: ID field as logical address
From: Walter Mitty <wamitty_at_verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 21:42:18 GMT
Message-ID: <_QCUl.1970$9L2.1619_at_nwrddc02.gnilink.net>
> ...
> ...
> "autogenerated ID eliminates all confusion", what a laugh, almost sounds
> like a sleeping pill slogan.
> Walter, I suggest the only important claim here is that somehow relational
> theory doesn't offer a way to constrain such values. Certainly, since we
> are presented with the two different relation values, such a constraint
> could be written algebraically and I presume also in FOL, without resort
> to generated id's. Nothing wrong with generated ID's per se, but they
> aren't essential in this context. BTW, one of the many other confusions I
> snipped is that assignment is part of relational theory, whereas it's not,
> it is a concept certain kinds of languages need. But the basic confusion
> remains - the wilfull imputing of unspoken requirements, almost as if the
> existence of some app with some arbitrary requirement requires that all
> apps support that requirement..
Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 21:42:18 GMT
Message-ID: <_QCUl.1970$9L2.1619_at_nwrddc02.gnilink.net>
"paul c" <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac> wrote in message
news:ImwUl.30133$PH1.14509_at_edtnps82...
> Walter Mitty wrote:
>> "Brian Selzer" <brian_at_selzer-software.com> wrote in message
> ...
>>> {{L:Smith, F:Mary, Stat:Single},
>>> {L:Jones, F:Mary, Stat:Married}}
>>>
>>> and is then assigned the value,
>>>
>>> {{L:Smith, F:Mary, Stat:Divorced},
>>> {L:Jones, F:Mary, Stat:Married}}
>>> ...
> ...
>>> Note that the introduction of an autogenerated ID eliminates all >>> confusion: >>> ... >
> "autogenerated ID eliminates all confusion", what a laugh, almost sounds
> like a sleeping pill slogan.
>
> Walter, I suggest the only important claim here is that somehow relational
> theory doesn't offer a way to constrain such values. Certainly, since we
> are presented with the two different relation values, such a constraint
> could be written algebraically and I presume also in FOL, without resort
> to generated id's. Nothing wrong with generated ID's per se, but they
> aren't essential in this context. BTW, one of the many other confusions I
> snipped is that assignment is part of relational theory, whereas it's not,
> it is a concept certain kinds of languages need. But the basic confusion
> remains - the wilfull imputing of unspoken requirements, almost as if the
> existence of some app with some arbitrary requirement requires that all
> apps support that requirement..
I am confused. Your comment is directed at me but you quote Brian. What's going on? Received on Sun May 31 2009 - 23:42:18 CEST