4 ms·
A better analogy IMO is Python, Ruby et al calling themselves "dynamic languages" to distinguish themselves from the popular static languages of the time.
by jbellis 17y ago
A better analogy IMO is Python, Ruby et al calling themselves "dynamic languages" to distinguish themselves from the popular static languages of the time.
- scott_s 17y agoBut they called themselves dynamic, not "NoC++" or "NoJava". That is, it was described by its intrinsic properties instead of as not "a specific instance of a something that implements what they don't like." SQL is a way to interact with a relational database, but it is not itself a database. But "NoRDBMS" still isn't as good as saying what the technology is - there are an infinite number of things that are not relational databases.