Re: General semantics

On May 21, 7:42 pm, Bob Badour <bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> > Sorry, Bob, I think that came out the wrong way.  I meant a direct
> > description of OOP in a RM would require a domain called OID over
> > which we can define relations.  In current SQL systems, I could use an
> > integer of the same width as the address bus.  I certainly don't want
> > to change the RM in any way.
>
> Sorry, Nilone, it's still sounds like a lousy idea to me.

Would you mind telling me why? It seems to me you deny either the effectiveness or the efficiency of a relational description of a system, or the permission to do so. As long as I don't try to build an inferior tool with a better one, where is the problem in using the latter to analyze the former? Received on Fri May 21 2010 - 21:28:59 CEST