Re: If you were to implement the original relation algebra language...
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_golden.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 14:08:37 -0500
Message-ID: <m_2dnes63Z0zKSKiRVn-vg_at_golden.net>
Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2003 14:08:37 -0500
Message-ID: <m_2dnes63Z0zKSKiRVn-vg_at_golden.net>
"Marshall Spight" <mspight_at_dnai.com> wrote in message
news:Q6Ovb.208724$275.779602_at_attbi_s53...
> "Paul Vernon" <paul.vernon_at_ukk.ibmm.comm> wrote in message
news:bpkvlo$1h6a$1_at_gazette.almaden.ibm.com...
> >
> > I guess we would be better off moving away from infix operators and
using
> > prefix/functional operations instead in relational algebra grammers.
>
> I think we would be better off providing the language with enough
> flexibility so that the programmer can choose the most appropriate
> form of expression at the time. cf. Haskell.
Are you suggesting you prefer redundant languages? Received on Sat Nov 22 2003 - 20:08:37 CET