Waaah, I don't get paid to use new shiny languages
-
@Kamil-Podlesak said in Waaah, I don't get paid to use new shiny languages:
Am I the only one triggered by the notion that every relation database other than Oracle is "SQL Server" and that it apparently means "Microsoft SQL Server"?
It might mean PostgreSQL Server.
-
@Kamil-Podlesak There was a PEP proposal to add something similar to Python (https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0463/). It was rejected because Guido didn't feel it had a sufficient motivation.
I mean, I disagree, but I'm not a programming language designer.
-
@dkf I think it's always been pretty clear that 'SQL Server' is Microsoft SQL Server, that's the name of the product and so is accurate. AFAIK, there is no other RDBMS called 'SQL Server'.
Microsoft was smart as now when people use SQL Server as a more general term, other people may just assume they mean Microsoft.
-
@Harris_Mirza said in Waaah, I don't get paid to use new shiny languages:
@Kamil-Podlesak There was a PEP proposal to add something similar to Python (https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0463/). It was rejected because Guido didn't feel it had a sufficient motivation.
I mean, I disagree, but I'm not a programming language designer.
Interesting. Even the
KeyErrorexample, which is something that I genuinely dislike in python.On the other hand, I agree that it's not such big a deal in a language with duct taping. Now in fully typed language, with strictly typed ("checked") exceptions, that would be huge.
-
@Kamil-Podlesak said in Waaah, I don't get paid to use new shiny languages:
@error said in Waaah, I don't get paid to use new shiny languages:
@Grunnen said in Waaah, I don't get paid to use new shiny languages:
Suppose you have two people in your table with the same first name, but both have NULL as their last name. Then you can’t do a dumb comparison and conclude they are the same person.
There was a long argument ages ago about whether SQL Server or Oracle's semantics made more sense. SQL Server holds that empty string and null are completely different. Oracle thinks that they're the same (but not the same since
nullis not=tonull).IMHO it's useful to distinguish between "this field is known to be empty" (similar to zero) and "this field is not known" (null).
Am I the only one triggered by the notion that every relation database other than Oracle is "SQL Server" and that it apparently means "Microsoft SQL Server"?
Edit: Of course, the Oracle
handling of empty strings is definitely insane 
I think he was just using "SQL Server" as a prominent RDBMS where an empty string is distinct from null. But yeah, when people say "SQL Server" they generally mean Microsoft's. I'm not triggered by that.
But I've also been using Oracle long enough that the empty string is null is normal to me, so...
-
@boomzilla said in Waaah, I don't get paid to use new shiny languages:
the empty string is null is normal to me
That's generally not really the problem anyway. The problem arises because
'' = ''is not true.
-
@PleegWat indeed. My point though is that I've internalized that well enough that it's not really an issue. Although honestly it's not really a comparison that I have to do very often.
-
@Harris_Mirza said in Waaah, I don't get paid to use new shiny languages:
I think it's always been pretty clear
-
@Kamil-Podlesak said in Waaah, I don't get paid to use new shiny languages:
language with duct taping
-
@topspin It's figurative. The variables don't have types at compile time, but at runtime they get the types duct taped to them along with the values
-
@hungrier said in Waaah, I don't get paid to use new shiny languages:
@topspin It's figurative. The variables don't have types at compile time, but at runtime they get the types duct taped to them along with the values
I was just curious if it's a typo or one of our intentional misspellings akin to pendant, raisins, upboat, etc.
-
-
@topspin I've never heard it before, but it could become part of the shared lexicon of the forum
-
@hungrier said in Waaah, I don't get paid to use new shiny languages:
@topspin I've never heard it before, but it could become part of the shared lexicon of the forum
-
@boomzilla said in Waaah, I don't get paid to use new shiny languages:
I've also been using Oracle long enough ... normal to me
Ah, that explains so much about your ... personality quirks.
-
@dkf I missed the emoji. I have actually met people who would consider that as an option, so it's not too far fetched.
-
@Rhywden said in Waaah, I don't get paid to use new shiny languages:
The guy complains about the lack of built-in immutability in C# using one sentence (does not exist)
And then says that Javascript has good libraries for immutable data.
Oh, just because I've been reminded due to an upvote: C# 9.0 has
Recordsnow. Which are immutable by design.The
Equalsoperator for Records works on a value equality (not reference) and they have the equivalent of the spread operator if you need to copy a record with one value changed.
