Re: Value (was: Mixing OO and DB)
- From: "Yagotta B. Kidding" <ybk@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 29 Feb 2008 01:03:38 +0100 (CET)
Jan Hidders <hidders@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:42d7d4ee-0a07-4070-81a1-002b25f303ae@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
On 28 feb, 17:47, "Yagotta B. Kidding" <y...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Jan Hidders <hidd...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote320d26a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
innews:2d8e2a19-1dd3-49ed-89d3-5c2d9
But what is essential for value types in the context of database
theory is that the elements of the sets have representations
associated with them, i.e., ways in which they can be represented
in a computer or to a human being. That IMNSHO is the defining
characteristic of a value data type vs. other data types, and
thereby also defines what is and is not a value.
What are other abstract data types that are not values in the context
of database theory?
Those that don't include such representations, of course. :-)
'I know what they are, but I won't tell you'!
Nice answer. Much appreciated, thank very much.
.
- References:
- Re: Mixing OO and DB
- From: Marshall
- Value (was: Mixing OO and DB)
- From: mAsterdam
- Re: Value (was: Mixing OO and DB)
- From: Marshall
- Re: Value (was: Mixing OO and DB)
- From: David BL
- Re: Value (was: Mixing OO and DB)
- From: Jan Hidders
- Re: Value (was: Mixing OO and DB)
- From: Yagotta B. Kidding
- Re: Value (was: Mixing OO and DB)
- From: Jan Hidders
- Re: Mixing OO and DB
- Prev by Date: Re: header part of the value?
- Next by Date: Re: Mixing OO and DB
- Previous by thread: Re: Value (was: Mixing OO and DB)
- Next by thread: Re: Mixing OO and DB
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|