375 karma · joined May 1, 2011
Maybe what you mean, is you want a terminal that can display a number of well-know content-types, negotiate with an upstream process for the content, receive that as a stream of bytes, for display to the user. :)
No need to apologize for the ignorance you are seeking to dispel.
So, if you wanted to tune your text prediction software for your phone...
Indeed. Today every webapp developer is a security specialist.
> Certain audit reports (e.g., date and time of last login) should be provided by the system directly to the user.
In 2013, this still makes sense, but is not often implemented.
Article implies: (++) :: [a] -> a -> [a]
Once you are at the point of considering execution time to be a side effect, the purity of any non-trivial expression vanishes.
I do agree with the author that using a comprehension for the side-effect is smelly.
When companies "compete" by buying out the competition and shutting down trade, there is a loss of choice and utility and a loss to consumers.
More likely, someone who has invested in a kindle will pay a higher price to obtain the convenience of the ebook and justify that investment. Publisher is just maximizing profit by setting price higher.
It's worth considering the correspondence between the concept of functional dependency in the relational model, and the concept of a pure function in functional programming. The issue under discussion, then, is whether referential transparency is afforded in the database.
While referential transparency in a database is achieved momentarily at the right isolation level, it is not achieved in the eternal sense of a pure function.
This is because the functional dependency in FP encodes an intensional definition, whereas the functional dependency captured in a relation is extensional, usually modelling the state of the knowledge of the relevant world, and therefore being subject to change.
But I do think he has been a bit unfair to databases (and primary keys) generally, in characterizing them as "place oriented". The relational model is actually a brilliantly successful example of a value-oriented information technology.
The very foundation of the relational model is the information principle, in which the only way information is encoded is as tuples of attribute values.
As a consequence, the relational model provides a technology that is imbued with all of the the virtues of values he discusses. * language independence * values can be shared * don't need methods * can send values without code * are semantically transparent * composition, etc.
It's true that we can think of the database itself as a place, but that's a consequence of having a shared data bank in which we try to settle a representation of what we believe to be true. Isolation gives the perception of a particular value. In some ways, this is just like a CDN "origin".
Also regarding using primary key as "place". Because capturing the information model is the primary task in designing a relational database schema, the designer wants to be fairly ruthless by discarding information that's not pertinent. For example, in recording student attendance, we don't record the name of the attending student - just their ID. This is not bad. We just decided that in the case of a name change, it's not important to know the name of the student as at the time of their attendance. If we decide otherwise, then we change the schema.
But there is that step of translation. Perhaps we became so fluent that we stopped noticing we were doing it, and perhaps even to start thinking imperatively. But it's not "natural".
Look at computing polynomials by differences (giving rise to the idea of the difference engine): better described as an iterated procedure than an imperative program.
Or "constuctive": Construct an ellipse naturally by the pins and string method. Bisect an angle naturally using straight-edge and compass.
Actually, there is a whiff of a trade dispute brewing between Australia and US about this.
> "the US has accused the Australian government of misleading its agencies about the Patriot Act’s scope, and warned that its [cloud service providers] should not be barred from competing for the work."
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/national/public-service/trad...
http://web.mit.edu/academicintegrity/citing/whatandwhy.html
(To be honest, I got this link from wikipedia :)
UTC is clearly not suitable for this.
On the other hand, no-one is looking to add 8 months to a localtime and have it make sense. This kinds of scheduling decisions will always be supervised by humans.
And the "Chile" example just goes to show you should be prepared to update a schedule. Airlines do this all the time.
Food for thought.