> SQL stood the test of time. SQL is widely adopted. I'm highly dubious of "it is widely used so there" arguments. I think in the case of SQL, the fact that OR

> SQL stood the test of time. SQL is widely adopted. I'm highly dubious of "it is widely used so there" arguments. I think in the case of SQL, the fact that ORMs and SQL generators are ubiquitous are evidence that a huge proportion of engineers would rather not write it, and part of why it is still widely used (most of the time, most people can avoid actually touching it). > I would argue that countless productivity has been lost to learning yet another query language for yet another NoSQL db. Mongo has its own query language. Cassandra has its own. Neo4j has its own. What not. Guess what, few engineers need these to solve their actual problem. This is exactly one of the points I addressed in my comment... none of those are even relational databases. And this is where the discussion ends up every time someone says SQL sucks. > Is english the best language? No, not even close. Should one learn it? Probably. The vast majority of the time, when you are using English, you have no control over the receiving end. The vast majority of time, when you are using SQL, you / your org grabbed an SQL RDBMS to use. Furthermore, I don't see why a modern, reasonable query language couldn't transpile to SQL easily when necessary, making all path-dependency / adoption arguments void.