Re: Notions of Type

From: Aloha Kakuikanu <aloha.kakuikanu_at_yahoo.com>
Date: 17 Aug 2006 11:51:13 -0700
Message-ID: <1155840673.448704.161470_at_p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>

David Cressey wrote:
> why can't you say,
>
> PROJECT <relation>, <empty relation> -> <relation>

Well, you are just one step away from noticing that

PROJECT <relation> (onto) <empty relation>

is the same as

<relation> UNION <empty relation> Received on Thu Aug 17 2006 - 20:51:13 CEST

This message: [ Message body ]
Next message: Gene Wirchenko: "Re: How to force two entities to point to the same lookup value"
Previous message: erk: "Re: Trying to define Surrogates"
In reply to: David Cressey: "Re: Notions of Type"
In reply to paul c: "Re: Notions of Type"
Next in thread: J M Davitt: "Re: Notions of Type"

Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by thread ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]

Original text of this message