# Re: more on delete from join

Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 22:39:49 -0700 (PDT)

Message-ID: <2b128d1f-7303-4890-b591-45868329f4d9_at_g1g2000pra.googlegroups.com>

On Aug 29, 12:30 pm, "Mr. Scott" <do_not_re..._at_noone.com> wrote:

> "Kevin Kirkpatrick" <kvnkrkpt..._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.
*

I see no evidence that Bob has trouble telling assignments and equations apart.

*> x := x + 1 definitely not an equation.
*

Of course it isn't.

> 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.
*

Whether it is an equation or not depends on what those symbols you typed are supposed to mean. So far all you've said is that they aren't equations. However they are both closer in form to equations than to assignments, according to custom.

> The result?

*>
**> x = 2 and y = 1? possible.
**> x = 503423 and y = 503422? also possible.
**> x = -324 and y = -325 also possible.
*

But you said above that they were *not* equations, so where are you deriving these from?

*> I think it defies logic for assignment to be anything but deterministic.
*

No one has said anything about nondeterminism that I've seen.

Marshall Received on Sun Aug 30 2009 - 07:39:49 CEST