Thread: [GENERAL] Avoiding repeating simple field definitions

I saw a thing somewhere about avoiding repeating the same field definitions. So an app I’m working on uses an exactly 6-character sting as an identifier, which appears in many places.

On 02/02/2017 07:20 AM, Guyren Howe wrote:
> I saw a thing somewhere about avoiding repeating the same field
> definitions. So an app I’m working on uses an exactly 6-character sting
> as an identifier, which appears in many places.

The thing would be?

Can you show an example of the 6 character string and how it is used in
multiple places?

What is your concern?

>
> IIRC, the thing I read proposed defining a type AS IMPLICIT, but I’m not
> sure. Mainly because the docs urge caution with using AS IMPLICIT.
>
> Thoughts?


--
Adrian Klaver
adrian.klaver@aklaver.com

On 2/2/2017 7:20 AM, Guyren Howe wrote:
> I saw a thing somewhere about avoiding repeating the same field
> definitions. So an app I’m working on uses an exactly 6-character
> sting as an identifier, which appears in many places.

are you talking about data normalization ?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_normalization


--
john r pierce, recycling bits in santa cruz