 | | Re: wishing upon a star
|
|
(...) Whoops. Talking in shorthand tripped me up. In system-architect-speak "business" logic is the actual desired work effort of the program (contrasted with non business logic which is the infrastructure or other code that you have to do in order (...) (25 years ago, 26-Aug-99, to lugnet.db.brictionary, lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| |
| | Re: wishing upon a star
|
|
In lugnet.db.brictionary, Dave Lovelace writes: [SNIP] (...) Well, not so fast. All ideas are welcome here. Maybe a larger perspective might help. I understand the frustration of an ignoramus coming to LEGO parts naming and numbering. I've been (...) (25 years ago, 26-Aug-99, to lugnet.db.brictionary)
|
| |
| | Re: wishing upon a star
|
|
(...) Pardon my inexperience. I am neither a program designer, nor a person with any business logic whatsoever...perhaps I should have footnoted these factss before sticking my idea out here. I think that 90% of the users of a would-be (...) (25 years ago, 26-Aug-99, to lugnet.db.brictionary)
|
| |
| | Re: wishing upon a star
|
|
(...) Precisely. It's not guaranteed to be unique and it has business meaning. Now, clearly, the underlying DB implementation should index on that column because we are likely to be doing a lot of lookups, but that is an optimization/implementation (...) (25 years ago, 25-Aug-99, to lugnet.db.brictionary)
|
| |
| | Re: wishing upon a star
|
|
(...) Taking that to the ultimate suggests even the TLG part number should not be the key (which of course is already a known issue if you want to account for color and/or printing). (25 years ago, 25-Aug-99, to lugnet.db.brictionary)
|
| |
| | Re: wishing upon a star
|
|
Yes, indeed, John is (as evah) right. Let me weigh in here as well... Putting meaning in keys is a sign of not very well seasoned designers, IMHO. A pretty strong principle of database design is NOT to let your key have business meaning. Get keys (...) (25 years ago, 25-Aug-99, to lugnet.db.brictionary)
|
| |
| | Re: wishing upon a star
|
|
Hi guys, I would urge caution on the creation of complex codes to identify pieces. I admit, I am prejudiced. I worked on a database management project back in the early 80s for a water-quality study in which water samples were identified with a (...) (25 years ago, 25-Aug-99, to lugnet.db.brictionary)
|
| |
| | Re: wishing upon a star
|
|
Hi Dave & Robert, Robert Munafo <munafo@gcctechNO.SPAMcom> wrote in message news:FGzv17.4G8@lugnet.com... (...) bricks. (...) the (...) one of (...) I like this idea. I think we could use the rest of the digits to identify the piece more accurately. (...) (25 years ago, 25-Aug-99, to lugnet.db.brictionary)
|
| |
| | Re: wishing upon a star
|
|
(...) I like this system, but just want to comment that it's not a complete substitute for the part numbers that LEGO molds on the bottom of the bricks. Another issue is that there are an awful lot of parts that don't fall into the category of (...) (25 years ago, 25-Aug-99, to lugnet.db.brictionary)
|
| |
| | Re: Part 4180
|
|
(...) Yes. :-) It first came with train wheels (it's situated with the train elements) -- 1980; both 2x2 and 3x3, but later (1981?), studded hubs were added. One of many discrepancies the Numbers Group has mentioned to Terry, but which have yet to (...) (25 years ago, 22-Aug-99, to lugnet.db.brictionary)
|
