Re: more on delete from join

From: Walter Mitty <wamitty_at_verizon.net>
Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 20:09:31 GMT
Message-ID: <%Vfmm.183$Jd7.49_at_nwrddc02.gnilink.net>


"Mr. Scott" <do_not_reply_at_noone.com> wrote in message news:K8qdnVRh-MdWHATXnZ2dnUVZ_h2dnZ2d_at_giganews.com...
> "Kevin Kirkpatrick" <kvnkrkptrck_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:cb3a626b-70c1-44ca-aec2-7a65cb69aa45_at_h30g2000vbr.googlegroups.com...
>
> <snip>
>
>> I'm not saying the notion of a programming language solving systems of
>> equations is undesirable. But I am saying that the language needs
>> more than just assignments to get you there.
>
> I think you're making the same mistake as Bob. Assignments aren't
> equations.
>
> x := x + 1 definitely not an equation.
>
> It may be desirable to have a programming language that can solve systems
> of equations, but....
>
> x + y := 3 definitely not an equation.
> x - y := 1 definitely not an equation.
>
> The result?
>
> x = 2 and y = 1? possible.
> x = 503423 and y = 503422? also possible.
> x = -324 and y = -325 also possible.
>
> I think it defies logic for assignment to be anything but deterministic.
>
> <snip>
>
>

This is starting to remind me of a language called PLANNER. Received on Sat Aug 29 2009 - 22:09:31 CEST

Original text of this message