Invisible wrote:
> (Anybody have any clue how the 
> relational calculus is different from the relational algebra??)

Yes.

> SQL is 
> basically the relational algebra with COBOL-style syntax. 

Actually, it's relational calculus with COBOL-style syntax. ;-)

> All of this makes me wonder... What would happen if somebody designed a 
> language which was exactly like Haskell, but had syntax like Pascal or 
> something? What if it didn't use terms like "monad" and "functor" and 
> "existential quantification", but used something more concrete-sounding?

Go for it. Then write a parser to translate it into Haskell.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   "We'd like you to back-port all the changes in 2.0
    back to version 1.0."
   "We've done that already. We call it 2.0."

Post a reply to this message