Re: Existence of proof verifiers: A comedy

On May 3, 12:26 pm, Marshall <marshall.spi...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 3, 8:14 am, Charlie-Boo <shymath...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:





On Apr 30, 6:18 pm, Marshall <marshall.spi...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Apr 30, 10:44 am, Jan Burse <janbu...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

This reminds me of the battle between CBL and Meghill:
[...]
Backhouse: I was using the Hindu System.

(Probably the author meant Jim Backus?)

That was pretty funny.

Some time ago in comp.databases.theory I parodied
a blog post entitled "Is Codd Dead?", Codd being Ted Codd,
the father of modern data management techniques.

Codd noticed that databases contain relations.  The rest of what he
said was a totally failed attempt to formalize and automate database
query processing.  SQL is an example of that failure, by virtue of it
being only a programming language rather than an automatic query
processor.

"Totally failed" is too strong. Partly failed, partly succeeded.
Still a definite step forward if you compare it to what came
before.

Is there a procedure for asking "List all employees who earn more than
their managers." (classic problem) and it figures out different ways
to do it (then one is chosen somehow)? Researchers say enter an SQL
query which must say how to create the list - each way requires a
different SQL program.

(History of data management is probably off-topic, though.)

All right - we'll do it quick then. HA! (Fat chance)

C-B

Marshall


.