3 ms·
I still largely reject the code completion complaint. Specifically, it is very common to know what columns you want before you know what tables have said colum
by taeric 3y ago
I still largely reject the code completion complaint. Specifically, it is very common to know what columns you want before you know what tables have said columns. This is especially true on normalized schemas where you are almost certainly having to do some joins to get all that you want.
So, does it somewhat complicate the logic? Of course. It is by no means impossible, though, and unless you are using super generic column names everywhere, the search space for what tables to suggest will be helped by knowing what columns you are looking for.
- dvlsg 3y agoI'm not sure. I think it's fairly common for something like "Now was the column name on this table description_primary or primary_description? I can't remember... Oh well, I'll just SELECT * and figure it out later" to happen. Starting with FROM would at least eliminate that backtracking.
- taeric 3y agoI can't say that you are wrong. I still find it hard to take as a complete argument. For one, you can almost certainly autocomplete all column names with an indicator for the table they come from. For two, you should be far more consistent in how you prefix things like that. :)
- dvlsg 3y agoOh for sure. This is definitely one of those "inherited some weird & inconsistent legacy system" situations. Honestly, it didn't even register as a potential issue in my mind until I had a chance to use LINQ query syntax in C#, and thought it was kind of nice to have the `from` up front. It's a minor annoyance at most, at any rate.