At 11:41 -0400 8/20/13, yary wrote: >I'll bite... this concept of "commensurablity" is not one I grasp from >your email. > >"functions are (sugarably) degenerate (many to 1) relations and >procedures are (sugarably) degenerate (state-transition) functions." >Perl & many other languages don't have a strong distinction between >functions & procudures (as I'm sure you know),
> ***** a "function" is a subroutine returning a scalar ( see below) >, a "procedure" is a subroutine with no >return value, side-effects only. A subroutine returning many values- a >parcel of containers, perhaps, or an iterator, etc- is a >"many-to-many" relation. I understand "relational algebra" from >decades of SQL work, and have seen ORM's replicate relations in object >systems with some success. What's missing for creating a relational >wonderland in perl6? I confess. I'm here because I hoped perl 6 would do vector operations after reading an early small book. I would really like to see perl support a function called a cross product that would return a vector, the product of amplitudes and the sine of the angle between them, as a vector using the <> notation. That's not a scalar! But i surely would be commensurate with the input arguments. It's still FORTRAN forever for physics, electrical engineering, and global warming. Sigh. -- --> Perl is the ductape of the internet. <--
