Re: Reflections of a beautiful mind... Fundamental principle: Separation of Concerns
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 14:19:55 GMT
Message-ID: <feq3g.65561$VV4.1249115_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>
>
> Nothing said about "special" cases - FWICT they were exploding
> combinatorially for the general case.
>
> I was referring to the slides Darwen presented at Warwick Uni some time
> ago - "Missing info without nulls" which I perhaps erroneously
> associated with their TTM.
>
> I particularly like the foot note on page 9 ...
> <quote>
> Nothing wrong with the predicates now! And we have reduced the salary
> part of the database to the simplest possible terms. Yes, some of the
> complicated queries get more difficult now, because we might have to
> combine these tables back together again, but the simple queries, such
> as “How much salary does each person (who has a known salary) earn?” and
> “Who earns no salary?” become trivial.
> </quote>
>
> To me this triplet of sentences is tantamount to blowing your (sic)
> proverbial foot off with a 155mm field gun even moreso than simply
> selecting a 12 guage shotty for the job.
>
> But then I could be wrong!
Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2006 14:19:55 GMT
Message-ID: <feq3g.65561$VV4.1249115_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
Frank Hamersley wrote:
> Bob Badour wrote:
>
>> Frank Hamersley wrote: >> >>> Bob Badour wrote: >>> >>>> For instance, the third principle would seem to argue strongly >>>> against null and n-vl. >>> >>> >>> But isn't that the very technique (combinatorial explosion) that >>> D+D propose with D? >> >> >> You have lost me here. How have they introduced a cominatorial >> explosion of special cases?
>
>
> Nothing said about "special" cases - FWICT they were exploding
> combinatorially for the general case.
>
> I was referring to the slides Darwen presented at Warwick Uni some time
> ago - "Missing info without nulls" which I perhaps erroneously
> associated with their TTM.
>
> I particularly like the foot note on page 9 ...
> <quote>
> Nothing wrong with the predicates now! And we have reduced the salary
> part of the database to the simplest possible terms. Yes, some of the
> complicated queries get more difficult now, because we might have to
> combine these tables back together again, but the simple queries, such
> as “How much salary does each person (who has a known salary) earn?” and
> “Who earns no salary?” become trivial.
> </quote>
>
> To me this triplet of sentences is tantamount to blowing your (sic)
> proverbial foot off with a 155mm field gun even moreso than simply
> selecting a 12 guage shotty for the job.
>
> But then I could be wrong!
Yes, indeed. Received on Tue Apr 25 2006 - 16:19:55 CEST