Re: So what's null then if it's not nothing?

On 20 Nov 2005 14:49:16 -0800, michael@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:

>
>Hugo Kornelis wrote:
>
(snip)
>>
>> (snipped rest of Pick description - we were discussing NULL in SQL,
>> remember?)
>>
>
>...and how it has been the subject of much debate and the source of
>great confusion for many people. It is a bad standard.

Hi Mike,

Because way too many people started writing half-baked study books about
SQL when it became booming business. People who were just in it for the
buck, who didn't take the time to really study the subject matter, and
didn't have the patience to explain it properly.

"NULL means that the value is not known" is so much easier to write down
and explain than the actual definition of NULL, and it also makes it so
much simpler to explain the concepts and the logic of three-valued
logic, that it's almost too tempting.

A lot of "cowboy authors" obviously didn;t resist that temptation. And
other authors copied those descriptions (in their own words, of course)
for their books. Ever expanding the number of books with incorrect or
incomplete explanation of the concept of NULL. As shown by the very
un-true statements you appear to have picked up here and there about
NULL in SQL - probably from such books.


>I found this in the introduction to a book on samba:
>
>http://us3.samba.org/samba/docs/man/Samba-HOWTO-Collection/pr03.html
>
>"A good standard survives because people know how to use it. People
>know how to use a standard when it is so transparent, so obvious, and
>so easy that it become invisible. And a standard becomes invisible only
>when the documentation describing how to deploy it is clear,
>unambiguous, and correct. These three elements must be present for a
>standard to be useful, allowing communication and interaction between
>two separate and distinct entities to occur without obvious effort.
>..... Clarity and unambiguity without correctness provide a technical
>nightmare. Correctness and clarity with ambiguity create maybe bits,
>and correctness and unambiguity without clarity provide a muddle
>through scenario."

So according to this quote, a "good" standard is "transparent, obvious
and easy", and has documentation that is "clear, unambiguous and
correct".

Well, the ANSI documents are far from clear and easy (perhaps because
they strive too hard to be unambiguous?). And prohibitively expensive. I
already discussed that many books that are clear and easy are also
ambiguous or even incorrect.

As to the standard itself - if reality is not "transparent, obvious and
easy", then I'll prefer a standard that allows me to model reality in
it's full complexity over a "transparent, obvious and easy" standard
that can't capture reality with 100% accuracy.

YMMV.


>There has been little or no significant debate about null in Pick
>circles.

Probably because the market for Pick books has never been large enough
to attract the "cowboy authors" mentioned above.

> No need. It's clear.

Is it? In this thread, I've seen you write that Null in Pick is equal to
the empty set. But I've also seen you write that it's equal to the empty
string.

> There now exists the possibility for
>confusion among Pickies now too though - owing to the erroneous
>definition of null given in the UniVerse reference manual and quoted
>elsewhere in this thread. The source of that confusion stems from an
>attempt to fit in with SQL's standard definition.

Calling someone else's definition "erroneous" is, IMO, highly arrogant.
Not something I'd expect from someone who just took someone else to task
for showing "arrogance" in his post and for "daring to talk down" to
you.

>Look - my final word on this. Null is and should be defined as an empty
>set. Not missing or absent or unknown or anything else.

Even more arrogance.

NULL is used by many people in many contexts. The first character in the
ASCII character set is called Null - do you propose that the ASCII
character set replaces it's first character with an empty set? In C (and
other low-level languages), a NULL pointer is a pointer to nothing. Do
you propose that all C compilers are rewritten to change a NULL pointer
to an ampty set?

(Yes, these were rhetorical questions)

Why can't you just accept that SQL defines and uses Null in a different
way than Pick?

SQL has chosen a definition that enables one to distinguish between NULL
and an empty string. Unless I misunderstood your previous message, Pick
has chosen a definition that doesn't allow this distinction.

The Pick definition would be very inappropriate for a SQL database. It
would be disastrous in situations where an empty string is valid data,
but absence of data might occur as well. But since Pick uses a different
model to store it's data, it doesn't need NULL to represent absence of a
value. That gave the Pickies the freedom to give NULL a different
definition - which they apparently did.

Neither SQL's nor Pick's definition is "right" or "wrong". They are
different. SQL's definition is (IMO - YMMV) the best possible definition
for an SQL db. Pick's definition might well be the best possible
definition for a Pick db.

> I'll accept
>that it's not going to change in SQL-land - and that confusion will
>continue to reign. I'm aware of the problem now and can live with it.
>Really - it's not my problem.

And neither is it mine.

Best, Hugo
--

(Remove _NO_ and _SPAM_ to get my e-mail address)
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: math notation in db?
    ... the standard used by math journals and text books. ... SQL is not the answer to everything. ...
    (comp.databases.ms-sqlserver)
  • Re: Cost of ownership: MV vs. SQL Server
    ... >>If you are using SQL against MV, for example, ODBC would be your best ... > the alternative "Zero Touch Deployment" available with .NET. ... non-MS client environments? ... > as "standard" as any connectivity tool is going to get in our market. ...
    (comp.databases.pick)
  • Re: Crosstab REPORT, not query
    ... you can use the 'Database Tuning Advisor' against the SQL ... other books on ADP? ...
    (microsoft.public.access.adp.sqlserver)
  • Re: SBS2008 install from my MS Action Pack
    ... SBS Standard with X CALS allows X users to use the SBS Standard Server. ... SQL Server with X CALS allows X users to use the SQL, ...
    (microsoft.public.windows.server.sbs)
  • Re: Equates, object size and speed
    ... still use references like ... think of nothing like the weird and wonderful SQL or other schemas around. ... dictionaries etc just like you would expect ... programmers to enforce some kind of minimal standard. ...
    (comp.databases.pick)