RE: to_number question (excellent thread)

From: <Stephen.Lee_at_DTAG.Com>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 14:26:52 -0500
Message-ID: <D6339830FC73944E889CC3CEADDB205B0790953A@bu-dtagpo1.tracs.com>

> -----Original Message-----
> I think Dan Tow pointed out a potential upside ...
> I think Wolfgang Breitling pointed out that ...
> I think I agree with both of them, but ...

I don't want to run this into the ground so (maybe?) one more post from me.

I think what is going on here is a collision of theory and practice. It appears to me that the ivy covered halls of academia (certainly nothing judgmental in that tag is there??) want to treat the subquery as nothing more than a set to be intersected, unioned, whatever. While the practitioners want it to be a virtual, pre-built, stand-alone table because ... really ... honestly ... that's the way we mere mortals use them. The academicians want to keep the theoretical model pure and holy. The practitioners just want the stupid thing to work.

Please see the official ORACLE-L FAQ: http://www.orafaq.com

To unsubscribe send email to: oracle-l-request_at_freelists.org put 'unsubscribe' in the subject line.

--
Archives are at http://www.freelists.org/archives/oracle-l/
FAQ is at http://www.freelists.org/help/fom-serve/cache/1.html
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Received on Fri Jul 16 2004 - 14:24:37 CDT