On 9/16/21 19:29, Guyren Howe wrote:
Missing my original point here. The set theory is the _point_. SQL is
a gargantuan distraction from using it efficiently.
Imagine if COBOL was the only widely-available programming language
with functions. You might use it, because functions are really great
abstraction for programming. That wouldn’t mean that COBOL wasn’t an
utterly awful language.
SQL is like that, only for relations, sets and logic.
I am probably a bit biased because I am using SQL for a few weeks now. I
was the first person certified for teaching Oracle 6 internals in the
EMEA region and I was a certified Oracle 5.1.22 DBA on VAX/VMS. So, by
using SQL for several weeks now, I grew attached to it and I like it. My
second problem is my mathematical background. I have a Bsc in
mathematics and was quite well acquainted not only with the basic set
theory but also with things like Zermelo's axiom of choice, Zorn's
lemma and well ordering theorem. I am still quite familiar with the
relational algebra, unions, intersections, Cartesian products,
equivalence relations and alike. I think that SQL represents relational
algebra quite well. It must be doing something right, because it lasts
for so long. After all, it was created by a mathematician. There is a
famous quote from the move "Chinatown" saying that politicians, ugly
buildings, and whores all get respectable if they last long enough. The
same applies to computer languages. I love the smell of SQL in the morning.
--
I'll speak the key, the whole key and nothing but the key, so help me Codd.
Mladen Gogala
Database Consultant
Tel: (347) 321-1217
https://dbwhisperer.wordpress.com
