How 'bout using English? It's bad enough that too many people in the technology business don't know what they're talking about. I know that you DO, so please be accurate with your English. "Persist" is an intransitive verb (one cannot persist something; one can persist, and one can be persistent. And, oh, yes, data can persist.). Me thinks you meant "save" or "extract" when you used the verb persist in the article.
Example:
1)...how to persist data from a remote RDBMS to the local hard drive...
instead write:
...how to save/extract data from a remote RDBMS to the local hard drive...
2)...This does not persist the updates back to the local XML file...
instead write:
...This does not save the updates back to the local XML file...
Discussion on:
View:
Show:
I don't know--I think that our usage of "persist" is pretty common in the software field. It may not be correct Queen's English but I think it's correct Software English.
Teaching Intro to Programming is challenging enough for a non-code jockey, but many times the casual use of jargon terminology is enough to make me give up on trying to understand an article. This comment helped me learn from this article instead of just ignoring it as so much jibberish.
Thanks UnfortunatelyWkgForFedGovt.
Thanks UnfortunatelyWkgForFedGovt.
Silly person, do you not realize that the only language that does not change is one that has not been used in hundreds of years? Certain segments of a language community are likely to make their own alterations to the language. And eventually the dictionaries catch up. For example the term "mcjob" has been recently added to the dictionary.
The addition of a transitive use of "persist" is a reasonable extension of the English language. First there are elements that "persist." Now there are other elements that cause that "persistence." Making a verb transitive is the easiest way to indicate that "cause."
Russ Loski, MA Linguistics and MCSD
The addition of a transitive use of "persist" is a reasonable extension of the English language. First there are elements that "persist." Now there are other elements that cause that "persistence." Making a verb transitive is the easiest way to indicate that "cause."
Russ Loski, MA Linguistics and MCSD
If you had your way (and you won't) Middle English would thrive today. Programmers do persist, and some of them make a living doing so.
I don't care about the fuss of the proper use of the word persisted. It wasn't meant for english majors - it was meant for computer programming majors/junkies/fans. As such he wrote it with that crowd in mind. It's a good basic article. It flowed well and was in fact understandable to the intended audience.
Mav,
When you wrote that where you afraid that the Grammer Man was gonna come and get you:
the term persist is a term used often within the software biz. So if your trying to be a programmer then be one. If your an english teacher be that. Dont try to be both. Since most of us programmers are not very word friendly.
Theres an old saying in programming:
"Its ok to spell a word wrong as long as you spell it wrong every time"
Be persistant
When you wrote that where you afraid that the Grammer Man was gonna come and get you:
the term persist is a term used often within the software biz. So if your trying to be a programmer then be one. If your an english teacher be that. Dont try to be both. Since most of us programmers are not very word friendly.
Theres an old saying in programming:
"Its ok to spell a word wrong as long as you spell it wrong every time"
Be persistant
I have looked briefly at the XMLDataDocument. You create an XMLDom object that is linked directly to a dataset. I believe that you can save the XMLDataDocument to a file and then load it. I think that you can synchronize the document to the dataset.
Russ Loski, MCSD
Russ Loski, MCSD
Hi Charles Sterling,
Thanks for the beautiful article. But I have few questions. Does it mean that XML replaces the need of full fledged database.
Also what about the performance regarding accessing data in XML tables.
Thanks Again,
Sanjeev
Thanks for the beautiful article. But I have few questions. Does it mean that XML replaces the need of full fledged database.
Also what about the performance regarding accessing data in XML tables.
Thanks Again,
Sanjeev
Apologies for the late post on this thread but I've just discovered this site (through this very interesting article) and feel compelled to reply to a couple of points it has raised.
First and foremost I can see both sides of the English language in IT argument, however, even as a seasoned developer I experience words and phrases used out of familiar/accepted context that leave me puzzled and so appreciate the odd post that clears things up. As such I think the 'silly person' comment was a little unnecessary although the content of that particular post by RLoski I found very interesting. For the record, Americans have been abusing my native tongue for centuries so why shouldn't the IT world jump onboard
Moving swiftly on, interesting point Sanjeev although it boils down to (in my experience) a matter of relevant architecture. Every problem for which a software solution is sought presents a unique set of requirements therefore there may be many reasons why an XML data store would be justifiably preferred to a (R)DBMS in a particular situation and vice versa. Cost, complexity, security, performance and time are a just a few of the factors that might sway such a decision.
But to answer the question 'Will XML replace other RDBMS', in my opinion the answer will always be no. What I think we will see more and more of are vendors optimizing software to use XML and integrating XML more closely with existing (R)DBMS.
PS I know I shouldn?t start sentences with 'but'
First and foremost I can see both sides of the English language in IT argument, however, even as a seasoned developer I experience words and phrases used out of familiar/accepted context that leave me puzzled and so appreciate the odd post that clears things up. As such I think the 'silly person' comment was a little unnecessary although the content of that particular post by RLoski I found very interesting. For the record, Americans have been abusing my native tongue for centuries so why shouldn't the IT world jump onboard
Moving swiftly on, interesting point Sanjeev although it boils down to (in my experience) a matter of relevant architecture. Every problem for which a software solution is sought presents a unique set of requirements therefore there may be many reasons why an XML data store would be justifiably preferred to a (R)DBMS in a particular situation and vice versa. Cost, complexity, security, performance and time are a just a few of the factors that might sway such a decision.
But to answer the question 'Will XML replace other RDBMS', in my opinion the answer will always be no. What I think we will see more and more of are vendors optimizing software to use XML and integrating XML more closely with existing (R)DBMS.
PS I know I shouldn?t start sentences with 'but'
sir how can i do validation while reading the xml file and putting it in data set
and if validation tells the wrong input how can i stop it to put in data set
and if validation tells the wrong input how can i stop it to put in data set
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
