5 ms·

While semantically weak languages are appealing at first, all they end up doing is encoding the intrinsic problem domain complexity implicitly. This results in

While semantically weak languages are appealing at first, all they end up doing is encoding the intrinsic problem domain complexity implicitly. This results in “brittle code” and the inability to adapt. In short, powerful languages exist because they need to exist.

pydry 6y ago
This is a sign of a semantically weak language used in the wrong place.
- orbital-decay 6y ago
  Which is inevitable, I guess. If it can be abused to make complex systems, it will be abused.
  - pydry 6y ago
    It's not inevitable. Carefully ringfencing the capabilities of a weaker language and making sure that it is as powerful as is necessary enables you to have something conceptually simpler, easier to maintain and easier to read while maintaining the necessary level of expressive power. There are lots of examples where DSLs achieve this goal and the result is really nice and, unfortunately, a lot where they don't.
maweki 6y ago
That's not true though. SQL is not computationally complete. It does abstract over the complexity of access to relational data. And it is still used and useful. SQL is also not automatically brittle. There is a problem of a language gap, a mismatch between SQL structures and internal types, and all in all maybe a gap in typed code and unit tests. That does not mean you should implement your own database.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- ben-schaaf 6y ago
  Plain SQL is not turning complete, however SQL/PSM is and something along those lines is supported by (most?) database implementations like PostgreSQL, Oracle SQL, MySQL, etc. Seems to me like SQL is a perfect example of most people agreeing that the extra power/complexity is indeed a requirement.
  - 0x445442 6y ago
    Not sure the extensions were really needed though. Certainly the gaps could be filled externally and in a lot of shops it's what's mandated. I think an argument could be made that the extentions you're bringing up is more about a turf war between DBA's and Developers than about neccessity.
- antpls 6y ago
  Most of the time, the SQL queries are only useful when they are part of a bigger application, which is often written using a Turing complete language.

pydry 6y ago

This is a sign of a semantically weak language used in the wrong place.

orbital-decay 6y ago
Which is inevitable, I guess. If it can be abused to make complex systems, it will be abused.
- pydry 6y ago
  It's not inevitable. Carefully ringfencing the capabilities of a weaker language and making sure that it is as powerful as is necessary enables you to have something conceptually simpler, easier to maintain and easier to read while maintaining the necessary level of expressive power. There are lots of examples where DSLs achieve this goal and the result is really nice and, unfortunately, a lot where they don't.

maweki 6y ago

That's not true though. SQL is not computationally complete. It does abstract over the complexity of access to relational data. And it is still used and useful. SQL is also not automatically brittle. There is a problem of a language gap, a mismatch between SQL structures and internal types, and all in all maybe a gap in typed code and unit tests. That does not mean you should implement your own database.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ben-schaaf 6y ago
Plain SQL is not turning complete, however SQL/PSM is and something along those lines is supported by (most?) database implementations like PostgreSQL, Oracle SQL, MySQL, etc. Seems to me like SQL is a perfect example of most people agreeing that the extra power/complexity is indeed a requirement.
- 0x445442 6y ago
  Not sure the extensions were really needed though. Certainly the gaps could be filled externally and in a lot of shops it's what's mandated. I think an argument could be made that the extentions you're bringing up is more about a turf war between DBA's and Developers than about neccessity.
antpls 6y ago
Most of the time, the SQL queries are only useful when they are part of a bigger application, which is often written using a Turing complete language.