sunnie@lemmy.ca to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 9 months agono.. just nolemmy.caimagemessage-square52fedilinkarrow-up1392arrow-down116
arrow-up1376arrow-down1imageno.. just nolemmy.casunnie@lemmy.ca to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 9 months agomessage-square52fedilink
minus-squarecmdrkeen@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up72arrow-down2·9 months agoHonestly not the worst thing I’ve seen.
minus-squarexmunk@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up13arrow-down2·9 months agoI’d like you to think for a moment about CTEs, the HAVING clause, window functions and every other funky and useful thing you can do in SQL … Now just think, do you think that this syntax supports all those correctly?
minus-squarePrimarily0617@kbin.sociallinkfedilinkarrow-up27arrow-down3·9 months agosql syntax doesn’t support even itself correctly i fail to see your point
minus-squarecmdrkeen@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up14·9 months agoProbably no better or worse than any other ORM written in a more traditional language. Worst comes to worst, you can always escape to plain SQL.
Honestly not the worst thing I’ve seen.
I’d like you to think for a moment about CTEs, the HAVING clause, window functions and every other funky and useful thing you can do in SQL … Now just think, do you think that this syntax supports all those correctly?
sql syntax doesn’t support even itself correctly i fail to see your point
Probably no better or worse than any other ORM written in a more traditional language. Worst comes to worst, you can always escape to plain SQL.