Re: Arbitrary Constraints

From: Kenneth Downs <firstinit.lastname_at_lastnameplusfam.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 12:54:48 -0400
Message-ID: <pgvllc.lo4.ln_at_mercury.downsfam.net>


Marshall Spight wrote:

> "Kenneth Downs" <firstinit.lastname_at_lastnameplusfam.net> wrote in message
> news:hbcllc.lf2.ln_at_mercury.downsfam.net...

>>
>> What I would like to do now is determine if the most commonly encountered
>> "must have" constraints out there in fact have commonalities to them so
>> that they can be handled with a finite number of types, macros, or
>> utilities, and so their apparent arbitrariness can be categorized and
>> "normalized" as it were.

>
> I think it makes a lot of sense to think of this as working towards
> normalization rules for constraints.
>
>

Thanks. I think I will probably just need more examples from my own projects.

Right now the target practice project only needs column comparisons, so for now it looks like I am going to punt and put in simple operations like <, >, == and so forth and allow them to be linked to views as filters or to tables as constraints.

-- 
Kenneth Downs
Use first initial plus last name at last name plus literal "fam.net" to
email me
Received on Tue Oct 26 2004 - 18:54:48 CEST

Original text of this message