Re: Would be really nice if...

Haximus wrote:
> fitzjarrell_at_cox.net wrote:
> > Haximus wrote:
> >
> >>>Sometimes 'innovative thinking' isn't so innovative, nor in the
> >
> > best
> >
> >>>interest of the language. This is one such case.
> >>
> >>I will give you a little analogy of your way of thinking: the boss
> >
> > sends
> >
> >>you out for a selection of donuts and dutifully you head down to
> >
> > Dunkin'
> >
> >>Donuts or where ever. The first thing you notice is that the boss'
> >
> > list
> >
> >>matches the offering at the store identically, only one item they
> >
> > have isn't
> >
> >>on the list - a plain donut. Now, most people will say "give me
one
> >
> > of
> >
> >>everything except the plain donut!" But not Fitzy, due to his
> >
> > stubborn
> >
> >>nature he must verbally list each and all the donuts specified in
the
> >
> > list,
> >
> >>one by one, to his server. Meanwhile people are waiting in line
> >
> > behind
> >
> >>Fitzy, wondering wtf he doesn't just specify which ones he DOESN'T
> >
> > wan't in
> >
> >>order to save time.
> >
> >
> > How does comparing a programming language to a natural language
make
> > this a valid analogy? You're showing your 'innovative' though
process
> > again, and it's failed miserably this time, too. Please stop
> > attemtpting to bolster your ludicrous suggestion with vain attempts
at
> > logic, as logical proof is obviously not your strong point.
>
> You didn't spend too much time thinking about that response I can
see.
> Please tell me which Oracle DML/DDL doesn't have a direct natural
> language equivalent? It's 'natural' to mold technology to recognize
> human language interfaces, that's what makes technology easily
adoptable
> by the masses, that's what makes business more productive, and that's

> what makes Oracle lots of money. You must really yearn for the days
> when the pocket-protector gang with the horn-rimmed glasses were the
> only ones who could talk to a database.

Presume all you like, your 'doughnut' analogy is rife with holes. SQL does not communicate between two people, it communicates between man and machine, something your 'doughnut' example doesn't cover. Saying "Give me one of everything except the glazed" to another human is one thing, as the person on the receiving end can easily discern what is available and what is not, whereas your 'select * except ...' business has no logical counterpart; you get what you ask for, even to the point of having an application break due to unhandled columns as illustrated earlier by Daniel. The SQL engine removes only what you tell it in your suggested syntax; it has no method of knowing that what you wanted, and received, before is the same as what you want now, table changes or not. "Hey, someone added col4 to that table, but the last time I got this query I sent out col1 and col3, so that's all I'll send out now." The doughnut guy, if you're a regular customer, can, and possibly will have your order ready to go as you walk in the door (depending upon just how regular a customer you are). He or she will know what you want and what you don't, somethiing that cannot be said about 'select * except bubba from cletus;', no matter how you try to gild it.

David Fitzjarrell Received on Thu Feb 24 2005 - 16:24:13 CST