ak39

92 ms·

871.
by ak39 14y ago
Thanks for the link. What a name for a product servicing the healthcare industry. :-(
872.
by ak39 14y ago
Lol! But, will this work? How do we ENFORCE mutually exclusive Male, Female & Transgendered records for ONE Patient record?
873.
by ak39 14y ago
Of course!! Many thanks. Goes to show we hardly use the DB engine to prevent crap data from being persisted! I blame the Java cargo cult for this. ;-)
874.
by ak39 14y ago
Curious. What's the best method of modeling a relational DB structure to enforce the rule that only: Gender=F and isPregnant=True combinations are allowed? I know application layer can handle this. Also triggers. But is there any RDBMS that
875.
by ak39 14y ago
Awesome. Thanks.
876.
by ak39 14y ago
Agreed. It's no longer a floppy disk. Its meaning in the new context has a life of its own. The fact that the metaphor no longer has any connection with is original context IS the reason why it is now effective! :) "When things, signs o
877.
by ak39 14y ago
That's it. Normalisation is about correctness. Every other aspect of software development using RDMSs will attempt to challenge decisions made for correctness' sake.
878.
by ak39 15y ago
Quote from link: "That you can only guarantee two of Consistency, Availability and Partition Tolerance is real and evidenced by the most successful websites on the planet. If it works for them I see no reason why the same trade-offs shouldn
879.
by ak39 15y ago
> If you've got someone who knows what they're > doing in charge of it, the latter solution will often > take quite a bit less time to write and debug, too." Ah, therein lies the rub. Spot on. My obversations: The last decade
880.
by ak39 15y ago
Great article, but does it answer the question it raised: Why has software evolution lagged behind? Also, is the focus on parallel computing the only litmus to judge this as the downfall of every imperative programming language? To answer
881.
by ak39 15y ago
And there I got happy thinking there was a explicit ban on pictures of shoes. :(
882.
by ak39 15y ago
Nice point. :) Which got me thinking ... Maybe the "closest" we can make CoD and other FPS to REAL war is ... make the first person die permanently and render the software useless after a fatal hit. Once & only once. The loss of $39
883.
by ak39 15y ago
Good post. This is definitely on point and relevant to HN visitors. This, for at least two reasons: 1. You never innovate in a vacuum: Whether it's genetically modified crops, cancer treatment, AI, encryption or energy solutions, all inno
884.
by ak39 15y ago
<Quote user=berntb> Please explain to me, what makes Israel worse than all the other area changes after the world wars? </Quote> Worse? Ok, I'll bite: It may not make it "worse" (sic) but it still doesn't make it right. Just
885.
by ak39 15y ago
:)
886.
by ak39 15y ago
Spolsky is a wanker. High notes, low notes who cares? The test of the acceptable programmer is in the works he/she creates. And to judge that requires answering the following: 1. Does the software do what it's supposed to do? 2. Does it