October 10, 2016 at 10:25 pm
I'll admit, this one got me. :hehe:
Thanks for the question.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This thing is addressing problems that dont exist. Its solution-ism at its worst. We are dumbing down machines that are inherently superior. - Gilfoyle
October 11, 2016 at 12:38 am
This is a quite uesful anomaly. It allows for easy cut'n'paste between table creation scripts, without worrying about deleting any trailing commas or having commas between constraints.
October 11, 2016 at 5:08 am
Okay, that's a little weird. Microsoft has updated the language to allow syntactically incorrect SQL based on popular habits. I see why they did it, but I don't agree with it.
October 11, 2016 at 5:17 am
Wow!!! Did not see that one coming.... :laugh:
October 11, 2016 at 5:32 am
Ed Wagner (10/11/2016)
Okay, that's a little weird. Microsoft has updated the language to allow syntactically incorrect SQL based on popular habits. I see why they did it, but I don't agree with it.
Oh, it's been like that for a long time. The same applies when initializing arrays in C#, by the way. Quite handy, if you ask me, and completely benign.
October 11, 2016 at 6:55 am
Thom A (10/11/2016)
Really wasn't expecting that answer. The skeptic in me does wonder how many people ran the SQL before giving an answer though
I'm one of the people who ran the SQL before submitting my answer. I view it as testing, not cheating.
In this case, I was surprised by the results. I really expected it to return an error.
October 11, 2016 at 7:09 am
Interestingly, if you examine Information Schema Columns, the table only has 3 columns.
There are no facts, only interpretations.
Friedrich Nietzsche
October 11, 2016 at 7:40 am
barry.mcconnell (10/11/2016)
Interestingly, if you examine Information Schema Columns, the table only has 3 columns.
I'd be a lot more surprised if there were more columns than that. Without a name or data type there isn't much to go on.
It's just a syntactical convenience where each item can be followed by a comma.
October 11, 2016 at 7:46 am
It just feels wrong.
October 11, 2016 at 8:53 am
Iwas Bornready (10/11/2016)
It just feels wrong.
I would say 'counterintuitive'.
Thanks to Steve for a provocative one.
October 11, 2016 at 10:34 am
Thanks for the question. I got it right only because I've seen it work. Not sure why it is allowed, though.
- webrunner
-------------------
A SQL query walks into a bar and sees two tables. He walks up to them and asks, "Can I join you?"
Ref.: http://tkyte.blogspot.com/2009/02/sql-joke.html
October 11, 2016 at 10:35 am
Thom A (10/11/2016)
Really wasn't expecting that answer. The skeptic in me does wonder how many people ran the SQL before giving an answer though
I selected my answer (execute with syntax warning).
Ran the SQL, kept my answer wrong, assuming it was a trick question because I SQL2012 and this would be a new feature in SQL2016.
Oh well, better luck next time.
October 11, 2016 at 10:45 am
I knew this one.
Thanks a lot for the question.
~ demonfox
___________________________________________________________________
Wondering what I would do next , when I am done with this one :ermm:
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 21 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply
This website stores cookies on your computer.
These cookies are used to improve your website experience and provide more personalized services to you, both on this website and through other media.
To find out more about the cookies we use, see our Privacy Policy