[cap-talk] How desirable / feasible is a persistent OCAP language?
Jonathan S. Shapiro
shap at eros-os.com
Thu Jul 17 13:29:41 CDT 2008
On Thu, 2008-07-17 at 11:10 -0700, ihab.awad at gmail.com wrote:
> Interesting. The argument on the other side, of course, is that people
> miss having Turing complete semantics to express the invariants and
> internal relationships within that alleged type system. Hence database
> triggers (horror!) and PL/SQL (septuple horror!).
Yes, but if you actually have such a turing-complete constraint
language, you discover that *that* has limitations too:
See Benjamin Pierce's "Types Considered Harmful":
Pierce is "the" guy on type systems.
Now if you *really* want to get your head bent out of shape, try to work
in a dependent kind system...
More information about the cap-talk