3 ms·
1. Ok, that looks correct now. 2. There's a word for such a system. It's called a database :-). 3/4. Ok, sounds good. But like many others in this discussio
by dfranke 19y ago
1. Ok, that looks correct now.
2. There's a word for such a system. It's called a database :-).
3/4. Ok, sounds good. But like many others in this discussion, you're confounding SQL with the relational model. Your pseudocode above goes slightly outside the relational model because it's written in imperative style, but can be adapted to it easily enough just by replacing your for loop with set-builder notation and maybe a unary union operator. Sure, SQL has warts. It was originally designed as a language extension for COBOL for chrissakes. But the language you're inventing is just a prettier syntax for basically the same semantics.
- mojuba 19y agoBut the language you're inventing is just a prettier syntax for basically the same semantics. No offense, drfranke, but this reminded me of a conversation I had long-long ago, with a group of physicists. I was saying Fortran was going to die soon and their only argument was "see, you can do it in Fortran! you are just replacing one syntax with another!". Actually damn Fortran died a bit later than I expected, but those're just technical details :)
- pfedor 19y agoFortran is still very much in use in theoretical physics/quantum chemistry departments.
- mojuba 19y agoBecause nobody cares about creating a decent math library for one of the mainstream dynamic languages.
- dfranke 19y agoOk, let's leave it at this: my YC app is for a web-based distributed RDBMS. It's going to speak SQL because that's what everyone is used to, but I've long entertained the idea of designing something nicer to work with and supporting it as an alternate frontend for the query compiler. If you have good ideas about how to do this, and think you're capable of implementing them, then please do send me a resume.