Re: All hail Neo!
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 04:11:14 GMT
Message-ID: <CTf5g.1219$A26.33891_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>
>
> Plain text is notorious poor for conveying the presence or the
> absence of irony. So I want to explicitly tag the following
> paragraph as non-ironic:
>
> I have changed my mind on this topic. I now agree with you
> that the empty-set solution is generally a poor one.
>
>
>
>
>
> Bob,
>
> Lately, and over the years both, you have called me all manner
> of names, and linked me directly or indirectly with all manner
> of societal ills, such as anti-empiricism, a weak European
> response to Nazism and Islamic Fascism, 7th century pedophilia,
> and homeopathy. But I say to you sir, that you have crossed a line,
> yes, *crossed a line* I say, when you mention me at the
> same time as you mention UML.
Date: Mon, 01 May 2006 04:11:14 GMT
Message-ID: <CTf5g.1219$A26.33891_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
Marshall Spight wrote:
>>Marshall Spight wrote: >> >> >>>What would you use instead? The decent tools that I'm aware >>>of are empty sets and tagged unions. >> >>And full normalization. Don't forget full normalization, which is always >>applicable whenever empty sets apply, and which I consider a better >>solution than empty sets. >> >>In some cases, I would use the type system to create special types akin >>to tagged unions. >> >> >>>You can get whatever >>>semantics you want from tagged unions and functions over >>>same. The behavior of fold (or aggregates) over incomplete >>>sets is well-defined; the functional programming crown has >>>beat fold to death. I don't see any reason for the system >>>to supply an UNKNOWN special value out of the box, but >>>as I say you can code one up if you want it. >> >>Yes, that's exactly my point. I don't want a dbms to incorporate some >>inconsistent and problematic silver bullet. If I want my types to have >>an unknown value, I will create them that way. The type system will >>enforce consistency while the dbms continues to use binary logic.
>
>
> Plain text is notorious poor for conveying the presence or the
> absence of irony. So I want to explicitly tag the following
> paragraph as non-ironic:
>
> I have changed my mind on this topic. I now agree with you
> that the empty-set solution is generally a poor one.
>
>
>
>>Self reports are useless or worse than useless. I don't know where you >>get your ideas regarding HCI, but it sounds more like you got them from >>a book on UML than anything from the HCI community.
>
>
> Bob,
>
> Lately, and over the years both, you have called me all manner
> of names, and linked me directly or indirectly with all manner
> of societal ills, such as anti-empiricism, a weak European
> response to Nazism and Islamic Fascism, 7th century pedophilia,
> and homeopathy. But I say to you sir, that you have crossed a line,
> yes, *crossed a line* I say, when you mention me at the
> same time as you mention UML.
Uh oh! [Runs. Hides.] Received on Mon May 01 2006 - 06:11:14 CEST