3 ms·

I'd like to argue for the inclusion of SQL to this list.

by icey 17y ago

jacquesm 17y ago
I was thinking about that but then again, SQL really is about as domain specific as it gets, then you'd have to put every other DSL in there as well... tricky choice. The languages above are all 'stand alone', not application specific, in other words you could conceivably program anything in them, that's a little hard to do in SQL. Using stored procedures it is turing complete, but I still doubt anybody ever wrote an application completely in SQL.
- icey 17y ago
  I have some horror stories I could share with you... I've rewritten more than one application where the entirety of the application was originally written in SQL (HTML presentation included) and then just emitted when the SQL was called. I'd also argue that SQL isn't as much a DSL as I think you suggest, it's the de facto choice when programming on the data layer for any RDBMS (sure, the implementations may vary slightly, but if you're writing SQL that's often your only choice for a language at the DB level).
  - jacquesm 17y ago
    Ouch. Ok, I'll take that evidence, SQL goes in. It will show at the bottom though, I can't insert it in the right spot. I feel your pain btw. That must be quite the mess.
  - tom_b 17y ago
    Ugh. That's as bad as some of the programs I've re-written to leverage SQL. Way too many resultset/for loop combos that took hours to run in Java or C# that turned into seconds with a little set-based thinking.
bhousel 17y ago
heh, which SQL? they're all different :-/ I wouldn't consider someone a SQL "master" unless they had worked extensively with several dialects and could compare the differences between them.
- icey 17y ago
  They are all close enough to similar. It's kind of like the difference between Scheme and Common Lisp. PL/SQL and T-SQL are different, but not so different as to require a new way of thinking, for example. Of course, I've worked with lots of dialects of SQL fairly extensively, so I may be over-simplifying.

I'd like to argue for the inclusion of SQL to this list.

by icey 17y ago

I'd like to argue for the inclusion of SQL to this list.

I was thinking about that but then again, SQL really is about as domain specific as it gets, then you'd have to put every other DSL in there as well... tricky choice. The languages above are all 'stand alone', not application specific, in other words you could conceivably program anything in them, that's a little hard to do in SQL. Using stored procedures it is turing complete, but I still doubt anybody ever wrote an application completely in SQL.

icey 17y ago
I have some horror stories I could share with you... I've rewritten more than one application where the entirety of the application was originally written in SQL (HTML presentation included) and then just emitted when the SQL was called. I'd also argue that SQL isn't as much a DSL as I think you suggest, it's the de facto choice when programming on the data layer for any RDBMS (sure, the implementations may vary slightly, but if you're writing SQL that's often your only choice for a language at the DB level).
- jacquesm 17y ago
  Ouch. Ok, I'll take that evidence, SQL goes in. It will show at the bottom though, I can't insert it in the right spot. I feel your pain btw. That must be quite the mess.
- tom_b 17y ago
  Ugh. That's as bad as some of the programs I've re-written to leverage SQL. Way too many resultset/for loop combos that took hours to run in Java or C# that turned into seconds with a little set-based thinking.

bhousel 17y ago

heh, which SQL? they're all different :-/ I wouldn't consider someone a SQL "master" unless they had worked extensively with several dialects and could compare the differences between them.

icey 17y ago
They are all close enough to similar. It's kind of like the difference between Scheme and Common Lisp. PL/SQL and T-SQL are different, but not so different as to require a new way of thinking, for example. Of course, I've worked with lots of dialects of SQL fairly extensively, so I may be over-simplifying.