Re: What databases have taught me
From: Bob Badour <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca>
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 02:57:37 GMT
Message-ID: <BS1ng.1380$pu3.36963_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
>
> And yet, people make that mistake again and again and again.
> The focus is on the easy part: structure. It is just like when
> people get in to language design and focus almost entirely on
> syntax, to the exclusion of the more important semantic issues.
>
> It's kind of an elixir thing, isn't it? Focusing on the easy part
> relieves you of the burden of thinking about the difficult
> questions of integrity and manipulation. That must be a good
> thing, right? I mean, if you had to come up with a query
> mechanism that could handle arbitrary ad hoc queries
> as simply as even SQL can, wouldn't that, like, totally
> harsh the buzz you got from reintroducing nested
> structures?
Date: Sat, 24 Jun 2006 02:57:37 GMT
Message-ID: <BS1ng.1380$pu3.36963_at_ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca>
Marshall wrote:
>>I think the focus on structure to the exclusion of manipulation is a >>mistake.
>
> And yet, people make that mistake again and again and again.
> The focus is on the easy part: structure. It is just like when
> people get in to language design and focus almost entirely on
> syntax, to the exclusion of the more important semantic issues.
>
> It's kind of an elixir thing, isn't it? Focusing on the easy part
> relieves you of the burden of thinking about the difficult
> questions of integrity and manipulation. That must be a good
> thing, right? I mean, if you had to come up with a query
> mechanism that could handle arbitrary ad hoc queries
> as simply as even SQL can, wouldn't that, like, totally
> harsh the buzz you got from reintroducing nested
> structures?