Coffeehouse Thread

10 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

[LINK] Slides from Erik Meijer's NoSQL is CoSQL talk

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    felix9
  • User profile image
    JoshRoss

    Thanks for the link! Is it me or are the **** and the stars reversed? It's funny how much work goes into finding a good acronym; take ACID and then BASE for example (basically available, soft state, eventually consistent). Now that's a stretch. All of this duality stuff can make someone crazy, unless you're Erik Meijer.

     

    -Josh

  • User profile image
    felix9

    huh, Erik was just doing all the research work in Google and Wikipedia ......

  • User profile image
    JoshRoss

    @felix9: Every LINQ query can be executed as a MapReduce computation against google.

  • User profile image
    fanbaby

    Category theory for computer scientists?? Only in a few years we will know if I am the greatest fool around, or someone at Microsoft has gone bananas.

    On the other hand even in math, I never have grown to like category theory. Yes, i know you cannot do much math today without it. Still, i'm on the "abstract nonsense" side : - )

  • User profile image
    exoteric

    There wouldn't happen to be a recording of that session, would there?

  • User profile image
    contextfree`

    @fanbaby: Huh? Category theory has been a huge influence on computer science for decades already, it's hardly a new thing, let alone a Microsoft thing. Although Erik Meijer's work at Microsoft has done a lot to popularize some of the ideas.

  • User profile image
    Richard.Hein

    , contextfree` wrote

    @fanbaby: Huh? Category theory has been a huge influence on computer science for decades already, it's hardly a new thing, let alone a Microsoft thing. Although Erik Meijer's work at Microsoft has done a lot to popularize some of the ideas.

    After a quick search I see some references going back to 1975.  That was kind of surprising.  I thought the real first implementation was not until 1990's in Haskell (monads).  Please enlighten us further on the history, if you know.  Thanks!

  • User profile image
    magicalclick

    After doing some try out with object oriented databases, I came to realize why everyone loves rational database.

    1) it is brain dead simple

    2) it is versitle

    3) you can abuse it

    4) it is brain dead simple

    5) it is brain dead simple

     

    While rational database is very stupid in many ways, aka, brain dead simple. It is also its strongest point. The data is raw, you can move, modify, "debug", without trying to understand how database works underneath. Other systems, when it failed, it is very hard to debug because the storage is not plain dead simple. Data is much important in this case. When something gone horriblely wrong, the brain dead design is where it is most reliable.

    Leaving WM on 5/2018 if no apps, no dedicated billboards where I drive, no Store name.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    contextfree`

    @Richard.Hein: My understanding of the history of category theory in CS (and category theory itself for that matter) is very very limited, but I think it goes back to work in programming language semantics, where mathematicians were trying not so much to create new languages based on mathematical constructs, but to use them as tools for analyzing/modelling existing languages. Then, later, people designing languages like Haskell went back and used some of the analytical tools from programming language semantics theory as inspiration for features in the language itself.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.