Re: Weak entity types

paul c <toledobythesea_at_oohay.ac> wrote:

[snip]

>Maybe I'm making the above exchange into more than it is but speaking of
>word choices and not to question my betters but I wish Codd had never
>used the term "model". It has so many connotations that are prey to
>willful twisting, such as "simulation" or even "emulation" that confuse
>the literalists, mystics as well as OO fans who dwell among minority
>rest of us into thinking that they can re-create reality in a machine.
>Also encourages the weak-minded to dream that just because there are
>mechanical ways that relations can be manipulated that there must be
>equally mechanical ways to define useful relations. The mathematical
>parallels that people come up with are useful but they remain
>abstractions by definition. Plus they are extremely partial, for
>instance there doesn't seem to be an algebra that embodies persistence
>without resorting to using the word "persistence" and I suspect there
>couldn't be one. Sometimes I wish Codd had called his invention the
>relational abstraction, then it might have been more clear that there
>remains an irreducible element of Picasso's clever madness in all of
>this, especially when it comes to cutting out the crap.

     Bah! It is not that easy. The mystics et al would have just found another way of expressing themselves. You do not really think that One Word would hold them at bay, do you?

     "Retro Codd, Satanas!" anyone?

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

Computerese Irregular Verb Conjugation:

     I have preferences.
     You have biases.
     He/She has prejudices.