3 ms·
> And nothing about local variables/controls/etc makes T-SQL "terrible". Compared to a full-featured programming language? It's good for its intent, which is
by Pxtl 10y ago
> And nothing about local variables/controls/etc makes T-SQL "terrible".
Compared to a full-featured programming language? It's good for its intent, which is to provide a minimal bit of procedural scaffolding for scripts that alter the database. It is terrible as a general-purpose procedural programming language, and I've worked with too much horrifying T-SQL and PL/SQL that pushes these tools way too far out of their intended workflow.
Yes, T-SQL is predominantely a declarative language. But it includes procedural components for writing procedural scripts. And unless we're talking about maintenance scripts or deployment scripts, don't use them.
- ianamartin 10y agoYou just need to calm down. Everyone here has spent a certain amount of time dealing with shitty code. That's all you're really claiming here. That some people write shitty code. And I agree. I've spent plenty of time with almost every flavor of SQL code that was incredibly shitty. But I don't really blame the languages that much. I blame the people who didn't understand when and where to use one language or another. And frankly, if you're seriously going to complain about T-SQL vs other "more full featured programming languages" and then make a blanket statement about not using any procedural components on SQL flavors . . . ummm, you might be your own worst enemy here.
- Pxtl 10y ago> You just need to calm down. You just said "I would shit a brick and beat a developer" upthread.