3 ms·
> Sounds a bit like "new thing scary" unless you show why having select in front actually avoids problems This isn't really fair. BeefWellington gave a reason
by garrettgarcia 2y ago
> Sounds a bit like "new thing scary" unless you show why having select in front actually avoids problems
This isn't really fair. BeefWellington gave a reason why SQL is how it is (and how it has been for ~50 years). It's reasonable to ask for a compelling reason to change the clause order. Simon's post says it "has always been confusing", but doesn't really explain why except by linking to a blog post that says that the SQL engine (sort of but not really) executes the clauses in a different order.
I think the onus of proof that SQL clauses are in the wrong order is on the people who claim they're in the wrong order.
- Sankozi 2y agoBut it has been explained many times from many angles. * SELECT first makes autocomplete hard * SELECT first is the only out of order clause in the SQL statement when you look at it from execution perspective * you cannot use aliases defined in SELECT in following clauses * in some places SELECT is pointless but it is still required (to keep things consistent?) Probably many more.
- bvrmn 2y ago> you cannot use aliases defined in SELECT in following clauses Some DBs allow it or allow it partially. It's a major constant friction factor for me to do a guess work across different database systems.