Oracle FAQ Your Portal to the Oracle Knowledge Grid
HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US
 

Home -> Community -> Usenet -> c.d.o.server -> Re: Article about supposed "murky" future for Oracle

Re: Article about supposed "murky" future for Oracle

From: Database Guy <dbguy101_at_hotmail.com>
Date: 25 Mar 2004 16:53:35 -0800
Message-ID: <7fdee71c.0403251653.28d05583@posting.google.com>


Sybrand Bakker <gooiditweg_at_sybrandb.demon.nl> wrote in message news:<t5d660ld9cv7hpmg8r9b5k876qurkp8hvp_at_4ax.com>...
> On Thu, 25 Mar 2004 15:51:21 -0300, Leandro Guimar„es Faria Corsetti
> Dutra <leandro_at_dutra.fastmail.fm> wrote:
>
> > I do use Oracle, but strictly for legacy apps. Oracle just
> >lacks a roadmap to standards compliance.
>
> ROFL. You are kidding are you? The
> 'standards' you seem to quote have several levels of compliance.
> And why would anyone even think about implementing the unreadable JOIN
> syntax of SQL92, if the older convention is more readable and works
> just as well.

So you think that a syntax that: (1) clearly splits out join predicates from other predicates, in an unambiguous manner, instead of mixing them together; that (2) requires you to only specify the join type once (instead of for each predicate used by the join - absolutely crazy); and that (3) uses natural language instead of contrived, non-standard operator symbols - is somehow less readable? And there was me thinking it was just not what you were used to.

Why did Oracle implement ANSI 92 join syntax, since you asked?

DG Received on Thu Mar 25 2004 - 18:53:35 CST

Original text of this message

HOME | ASK QUESTION | ADD INFO | SEARCH | E-MAIL US