Re: third edition of SQL FOR SMARTIES

"--CELKO--" <jcelko212_at_earthlink.net> wrote in message news:18c7b3c2.0411021110.6306b203_at_posting.google.com...
> I am getting ready to do the third edition of SQL FOR SMARTIES this
> month. If anyone has an SQL programming technique, trick or tip that
> they would like to see in the book, drop me an email.
>
> You get a virtual beer and your name in the book. Even better, if you
> have an improvement on something in the second edition, you get two
> virtual beers and a chance to humilate me in my own book!
>
> Code should Standard SQL-92 or higher, but if you do not know Standard
> SQL, then use vendor code that maps into Standard SQL (the most common
> example would be temporal functions) or it should be portable (i.e.
> The MOD() function is not part of SQL-92, but every SQL product has
> some version of it).

too lazy to switch to e-mail ... anxiously awaiting first election returns while baking banana bread and reading cdt...anyway here's my suggestion:

I'd like to see some inclusion of SQL for nested relations. It appears that is not consistently handled across vendors, although there is a SQL-99 standard.

If I get a beer, I'd prefer a low-carb variety. smiles. --dawn Received on Tue Nov 02 2004 - 17:09:53 CST