3 ms·
Not a great introduction to the language, IMHO. There is not a clear use of logic to automatically reason about anything, just query composition. It seems the l
by harperlee 6y ago
Not a great introduction to the language, IMHO. There is not a clear use of logic to automatically reason about anything, just query composition. It seems the language is much more powerful than what this introduction makes it to be!
> English words (...) often capitalized to keep the old-fashioned COBOL spirit of the 70s alive!
I like logic programming a lot but a convention not technologically enforced is a poor reason to argue for a language change. When arguing about SQL limited abstraction capabilities that space would have been better spent talking about CTE limitations, for example.
Also:
> To make things worse, SQL code is rarely tested, because “testing SQL queries” sounds rather esoteric to most engineers, at best
So nonexisting best practices require a language change, apparently. It was also not showcased how this can be done in Logica, beyond the table mocking that could be done with a "with xxx as (values a, b, c) select (query to be tested)" approach in sql.
- da39a3ee 6y ago> So nonexisting best practices require a language change, apparently. It was also not showcased how this can be done in Logica. Look for the section containing the text "As a final example, let us mock the comments table, in a unittest of a query." That demonstrates mocking and is explicitly pointing towards testing. The article is only a high-level intro document.
- harperlee 6y agoSorry, I was editing my post in parallel. I see what you are pointing to. I'm sure the language has been thought out for much more time than my reading of the post - I'm just complaining about this "presentation" post. It's not clear from the example what the language provides over just redefining the table with mock values for testing. I´m sure Logica has more than what's stated in here, it's just not a good example (IMHO).
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]