goto11

65 ms·

781.
by goto11 5y ago
In what way is SQL "low level"? I would consider it a very high level DSL. Agree about the verbosity. The syntax is quite clunky.
782.
by goto11 5y ago
Zero indexing comes from pointer arithmetics, where the memory address of an array is the same as the address of the first item. So the address of the n'th item is: address_of_array + size_of_item * (n - 1) Hence array[0] is t
783.
by goto11 5y ago
Nobody would had used it though as long as it was only supported in Firefox.
784.
by goto11 5y ago
IE only shipped with JavaScript and VBScript built-in. Other language engines could be installed (Perl and Python for example), but realistically nobody would write client-side code in a language which required a visitor to install support
785.
by goto11 5y ago
Microsoft supported a model with pluggable scriping engines which was supported both on Internet Explorer (for client side scripts) and WSH for system-level scripting. The same technology also allowed you to use multiple scripting languages
786.
by goto11 5y ago
> I wonder that Netscape didn't add a few more languages to the party as a fire and motion exercise against the competition. Not a great strategy when your competitor have much more resources than you have yourself. Microsoft could
787.
by goto11 5y ago
Also worth noting that an alternative language at the time probably would have been Perl or VBScript. Not sure this would have been such an improvement over JavaScript, whatever it's faults! A scheme-line language would have been cool
788.
by goto11 5y ago
> If you turned off JS, then you lost CSS too Bizarrely, this was because CSS was implemented on top of JavaScript in Netscape. Netscape was initially not a fan of CSS and developed their own JavaScript-based style sheets. Then at some
789.
by goto11 5y ago
JScript was the same as JavaScript. MS just called their implementation JScript for trademark reasons.
790.
by goto11 5y ago
There just never was a moment where the dominant browser vendors saw a strategic advantage to adding a second language. There was always talk and experiments with other languages, but nothing which got wide support by major browsers. Netsca
791.
by goto11 5y ago
> "Fertility statue addiction" has never been a thing. How do you know? I'm not asking rhetorically, I'm genuinely curious how you know this. We do have ancient myths about people falling in love with statues.
792.
by goto11 5y ago
I remember similar sentiments among geeks when GUI's became more commonplace compared to command line interfaces like DOS. But the reality is that for the majority of people using a GUI is much easier than a text based interface. A ful
793.
by goto11 5y ago
There are also some highly successful no-code/low-code platforms like Excel which are used for complex business-critical tasks.
794.
by goto11 5y ago
I push back against this statement: > People wouldn't be addicted to sex if the media wasn't shoving it down your throat Just read the Illiad to see how sexual obsessions have driven people since the dawn of history.
795.
by goto11 5y ago
Yes but most problems are simple. It also happen that Excel-sheets become too complex for their own good, but most excel sheets are pretty simple and never grow to that level of complexity. So if you don't know if a particular task w
796.
by goto11 5y ago
Sex existed (and made people obsessed) before mass media.
797.
by goto11 5y ago
No it is different. Years are just numbers and can be converted between different calendars. "Victorian" implies a certain political and cultural context. It's like saying "prohibition era London" or "Kentucky
798.
by goto11 5y ago
Tables are rectangles, and so are rows and cells.
799.
by goto11 5y ago
Does TypeScript have the most complex and advanced type system ever?
800.
by goto11 5y ago
The fundamental premise of the relational model is the physical/logical distinction. The relational model deliberately does not make any requirements or assumptions about how data is physically stored or structured. The difference betw
801.
by goto11 5y ago
Check constraints are just SQL expressions, so in pesudocode it would be something like: (SELECT COUNT(*) shape JOIN square JOIN circle) = 1 How conveniently this can be expressed depend on the database system in question. But if w
802.
by goto11 5y ago
Performance was not the selling point of relational databases in the first place. It is hard to beat the performance of a perfectly tuned hierarchical or graph database on the workloads they are designed for. At best a relational database
803.
by goto11 5y ago
Fair enough! But GraphQL returns data in a hierarchical format, so the property of relational closure is lost.
804.
by goto11 5y ago
Sure, in the 1970 paper "A Relational Model of Data for Large Shared Data Banks" where E.F.Codd introduced the relational model, he specifically mention how it is superior to hierarchical and graph databases, which were the domina
805.
by goto11 5y ago
> You can express a foreign key constraint that these tables must link to an employee, but not the other way around. You can’t guarantee in the limited type system of SQL that every employee row has a corresponding employee_X table, and
806.
by goto11 5y ago
You can do that with a check constraint, although I don't know if you consider it simple. It would be cool with better support for common constraint patterns.
807.
by goto11 5y ago
The basic premise of the relational model is that the physical storage structure and optimizations (including indexes) are independent of the logical model. A table could be stored row-by-row or column-by-column or any other clever way with
808.
by goto11 5y ago
If you put the foreign keys on the table_a/b/c tables, then you can express the same without having to introduce tagged unions.
809.
by goto11 5y ago
You would have the foreign key in the circle/triangle relations pointing to favourite_shape rather than the other way around.
810.
by goto11 5y ago
LINQ in C# supports a function-based syntax for querying. E.g. instead of SELECT foo, bar FROM baz WHERE zig = 7 You can write db.baz.Where(baz => baz.zig == 7).Select(baz => new { baz.foo, baz.bar }); It does have som

More ›