Re: Dreaming About Redesigning SQL

Patrick K. O'Brien wrote:

>lauri.pietarinen_at_atbusiness.com (Lauri Pietarinen) writes:
>
>
>
>>pobrien_at_orbtech.com (Patrick K. O'Brien) wrote in message news:<m2zng0m3oz.fsf_at_orbtech.com>...
>>
>>
>>>Lauri Pietarinen <lauri.pietarinen_at_atbusiness.com> writes:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>This is an interesting subject. Now when I think more of it, it
>>>>really depends on how complete this unified environment would be.
>>>>Is it possible to have a simple language that does nearly everything
>>>>you need?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>I think Python is a good example of what you suggest. You can write
>>>programs in Python that are strictly procedural, strictly functional,
>>>or strictly object-oriented.
>>>
>>>
>>I think you are mixing "functions" with "functional". Functional
>>would mean something declarative (no expert on that). SQL is
>>declarative, but Python is not. Why declarative? In declarative you
>>specify WHAT instead of HOW.
>>
>>Functions that you write in Python are procedural.
>>
>>
>
>I agree that functions written in Python are typically procedural.
>But I was talking about a style (or paradigm) of programming typically
>referred to as "functional." Here is an article that elaborates on
>the functional style of programming using Python:
>
>http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/library/l-prog.html
>
>Here is a quote from the article:
>
[snip]

OK. Thanks for clarification. But do you use the functional style in _your_ programs?

regards,
Lauri Pietarinen Received on Sat Oct 18 2003 - 21:35:28 CEST