Lynn Pettis (5/26/2009)
I am just a programmer. Been in the business for over 10 years now, I have changed the way I code so many times, but when it comes to SQL code, its still the same, horribly the same 🙂
I Might create/use stuff to make things simpler, wrappers, helpers, flashy SQL text editors etc... But, it still is the same old SQL I learned in University
I say time for change, even if it is gradual
SQL is changing slowly, but what is wrong with the language? It does what is supposed to do which is access data.
/sigh. Seems I hit a taboo subject by saying that it is time to change. NOTHING is wrong with it.
Nothing is wrong with Pascal, or Cobol, or punchcards either. They all do what they are/were supposed to do.
It's not a question of taboos. It's a question of, do you have specific, finite improvements, or are you asking for change for the sake of change?
The statement about it being old and therefore needing to change is "change for the sake of change", at face value. If you have specifics, that's another thing entirely.
Edit: Actually, COBOL doesn't do what it was supposed to do. A major part of its original purpose was to eliminate the need for programmers, since businesspeople would be able to build their own computer solutions with it. It most definitely does not achieve that goal.
Punchcards may do what they're supposed to, but keyboards and mice involve definite, finite improvements over them as input devices, and hard drives have definite, finite improvements over them as a means of storing compiled/uncompiled code/files.
SQL in general and T-SQL in particular, and SQL Server, have gone through a number of evolutionary improvements since I started using them in 2000/2001, and a few revolutionary improvements have appeared in SQL Server, like CLR procs and functions. There have been quite a few of them that have very little if any actual practical use, but there have also been quite a few that have a tremendous usefulness.
If you want to contribute to that continued evolution, or if you have something revolutionary that will be a huge improvement, say so and give specifics. Just lamenting how old SQL is and how tired that makes it, doesn't actually accomplish anything. (Sorry, I'm specifics and results oriented. Just the way I am.)
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon