Yes, the core of the problem with people "getting it" has always been that SQL has been so mediocre, and yet it's the only serious option people have. And so p

Yes, the core of the problem with people "getting it" has always been that SQL has been so mediocre, and yet it's the only serious option people have. And so people go looking for something with a modern syntax, that's properly composable, functional, etc. but because they haven't studied the foundations, they reinvent the wheel badly. The Codd paper is so readable, and so persuasive. People need to start there, and then argue why their novel approach is better on first principles, not just because it smells better than SQL. But that it's stuck around and done so well for so long tells you that the core foundation is sound.