Most complaints I hear regarding SQL can usually be classified in one of the following categories:That may or may not be true but Date is one of the authors of the SQL standard and one of the leading authors of RDBMS books, so I think we can assume that his criticisms are not those of a "crank".
- The complainer lacks a full understanding or appreciation of set and relational theory
- The complaint is made in relation to a weak SQL implementation
One thing that does annoy me about Darwen and Date's criticisms is that they are a bit too fond of making statements about facts they have already established and just refering the reader to the paper/article/expensive-book-that-they-just-happen-to-have-written in which they were established. They are struggling against a huge mainstream of standard SQL/RDBMS dogma they need to make their arguments easily accessible and not put the burden on the reader - that's fine for academia with it's well-stocked libraries but a bit much to expect of the casual reader who has not yet drunk their kool-aid.
In reply to Re^2: (OT) Why SQL Sucks (with a little Perl to fix it)
by fergal
in thread (OT) Why SQL Sucks (with a little Perl to fix it)
by Ovid
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |