No, not at all. You miss the point completely.
The keyword is revertible justice. Any penalty but death (or other physical injury) can be reverted with appropriate amount of money, apologies or whatever.
While you are alive, you can always start afresh. When you are dead - that's it.
People have been coding in embedded SQL or, to the contrary, various kinds of P-SQL all the time.
What is wrong with that?
Relational algebra, predicate calculus and what-not is all very well, but you have to actually write some code which, like, interacts with user, network, and some such. Last time I checked SQL cannot do that.
I wouldn't jump to conclusions so fast.
Why don't we consider a small example. In C++,
extern X x();
can be either a declaraction of a variable x of type X or a declaration of a funtion with no parameters and return type X. You do not know unless you know what X is (whether it has a parameterless constructor). And learning what X is requires quite some analysis - major PITA for any tool that tries to analyse C++ (compiler, IDE, dependecy analyzer - whatever).
In imaginary XML syntax for C++ such ambiguites will go for good.
Slashdot Mirror
You must be new here....
Mod parent up! This is '/. wisdom' oxymoron coming to love for once...
... for Commu^H^H^H^H^H Terrorists who will SAP and IMPURIFY all of our precious BODILY FLUIDS!!
Your argument is interesting in light of recent firings by employers because employees were pregnant women - even if they were pregnant only at home.
IANAL, but legal consequences of that will be, umm, mind-blowing...
No, not at all. You miss the point completely.
The keyword is revertible justice. Any penalty but death (or other physical injury) can be reverted with appropriate amount of money, apologies or whatever.
While you are alive, you can always start afresh. When you are dead - that's it.
This is why death penalty should be abolished.
The first is treatment of concurrency based on join-calculus.
The second is type system for XML. There is a lot of research in CS for strongly-typed XML processing (check XDuce for one).
TFA actually does a good job of presenting most important concepts of those for people not quite familiar with undelying theory.
My point was not that SQL is not needed. My point was that you need things besides SQL to write applications.
People have been coding in embedded SQL or, to the contrary, various kinds of P-SQL all the time. What is wrong with that? Relational algebra, predicate calculus and what-not is all very well, but you have to actually write some code which, like, interacts with user, network, and some such. Last time I checked SQL cannot do that.
In imaginary XML syntax for C++ such ambiguites will go for good.