Re: Storing data and code in a Db with LISP-like interface

I'm going to shorten your reply. See if you agree.

You said, (excerpts):

>One can't know the requirements ahead of

So, generality prevents (hopefully) the need for change if a future requirement is discovered.

You said:
> To achieve this, anything that is represented in a
> db, should be treated the same as all the other things represented in
> the db.

So the rules and relationships that are encoded in the schema itself has to be available for extension.

I'll skip the criticism of prolog. Not salient to this discussion.

So, the reason for wanting this requirement is "I don't know what I'll need in the future, and it seems to me to be common sense that we want to be able to extend the represented information".

Is that a fair conclusion?

-- 
--- Nick Malik [Microsoft]
    MCSD, CFPS, Certified Scrummaster
    http://blogs.msdn.com/nickmalik

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this forum are my own, and not 
representative of my employer.
   I do not answer questions on behalf of my employer.  I'm just a 
programmer helping programmers.
--