Re: Reminder, blatant ad

x wrote:
> "dawn" <dawnwolthuis_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1138642417.446297.171130_at_o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> > x wrote:
> > > "dawn" <dawnwolthuis_at_gmail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:1138627814.473060.169280_at_g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> > > > > What are the basic operations for combining lists and sets ?
> > >
> > > > The ones that come with any general purpose programming language.
> > > Can you make a list or a set with them and post it ?
>
> > That would take a smarter man than I. I'd be fine with the java.lang
> > libraries. They are well documented. ;-)
>
> I don't use java but I'll look.
> Are you talking about abstract collections ?

Yes. I wouldn't say that the collections framework is necessarily ideal, but it works. Not being someone who writes languages, I would say that the operations you are asking about are compositions of functions. Of course lists are maps (functions) which are sets. Perhaps I could answer a question about "how do you do this?" better than a general question about what the operators are (but maybe not).

> http://webkemper1.informatik.tu-muenchen.de:8080/interna/oracle10g/doc/appdev.101/b10799/adobjcol.htm
> http://www.stanford.edu/dept/itss/docs/oracle/10g/appdev.101/b10807/05_colls.htm
>
> http://www.lc.leidenuniv.nl/awcourse/oracle/appdev.920/a96595/dci01wht.htm
>
> You might want to look at
> http://gadfly.sourceforge.net/gadfly.html#architecture

Interesting. I had never heard of cylindric logic before. I didn't look into it (yet).

> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Where do we stop ?
> > >
> > > > I'm good with programming languages as a "stopping point" building up
> > > > from there to higher levels with libraries of code.
> > >
> > > Well, the programmig languages are many. :-)
> > > What programming languages are you refering to ?
> > > The future ones ?
>
> > I'm very flexible that way, which means to me that I'm a bit of a
> > peasant in that regard. I like functional and OO languages, but once
> > upon a time I adored procedural languages too and can tolerate
> > declarative languages.
>
> All these languages you talk about use the same model of data ?

No, but every general purpose language I have seen permits use of a logical model of data that includes attributes with values that are lists.

> > > > > Why not asking for a model to support all mathematics ?
> > >
> > > > Again, I'm good with programming languages and libraries thereof.
> > >
> > > A variable SET of variable LISTs of symbols and a variable SET of
> variable
> > > LISTs of substitution rules LISTed in some order is what you propose ?
> > > Or the other way around ?
>
> > What works for me is what I would call a di-graph of trees (a tree on
> > each node of the graph). You can see an example of this with html (or
> > xhtml) pages. You have a DOM tree (web page) on each node of a
> > di-graph (web). That is, effectively, what Pick is too, although the
> > tree doesn't go as many levels deep as the DOM.
>
> I didn't know this is what Pick is.
> What are the operators that Pick provides for this model ?

I'll have to learn how to think in those terms. One language provided with every Pick implementation is a version of BASIC called DataBASIC. You can see what operators are included in this at

http://jes.com/pb/index.html

But other languages can be used too (in client/server mode)

> Why not a di-graph of di-graphs ?

I don't have a good answer for why the web, a di-graph of trees, is so successful. I have ideas about it relating to language. If you think of a single proposition, you can model it with a tree (not unlike diagramming sentences as we did at my grade school). Then the relationship between propositions gives us a di-graph.

> > > Can you make such a thing declarative (specifying the data, not the
> process
> > > of getting the data) ?
>
> > I can tell that you will love (and perhaps dislike) my next blog.
>
> I can do both and vice versa at the same time.

It's posted http://www.tincat-group.com/mewsings

> > While I can understand the advantage to an exclusively declarative
> > language, I like verbs too. In the end, computer software is going to
> > process data. Making process fixed, but reusable (in the form of DBMS
> > tools) while the data patterns have to be perhaps overly clever (to
> > accomodate the declarative language constraints) and be coded fresh
> > each time, doesn't strike me as particularly fine.
>
> > If we had gone another route and made reusable data entities such as
> > Person, Address, Product, Order, etc building up to vertical industry
> > models with developers preparing the processes, would our profession
> > look different? Don't get me wrong, I think declarative languages are
> > important in the mix and have some benefits, but I am not fixed on that
> > as the ultimate goal.
>
> Do you have something similar to this in mind ?
> http://www.stanford.edu/dept/itss/docs/oracle/10g/appdev.101/b10807/12_tune.htm#i52954

I don't think that is what I was talking about in this paragraph, but yes, this has similarities to the trees-in-a-di-graph approach. In this case, the di-graph is made up of relations with foreign keys and the trees are in clobs. In the MV products you can store XML within the structure (not in clobs) if they are not too deep and then query them with the standard query language.
>
>
> You might want to look at
> https://dpt-info.u-strasbg.fr/doc/oracle/appdev.102/b14288/exprn_expconcepts.htm
> http://htmldb.oracle.com/i/doc/intro.htm

Definitely interesting. I hadn't look at Oracle HTML DB before. By the way, x, do you happen to work for Oracle? --dawn Received on Wed Feb 01 2006 - 02:29:30 CET