On Tue, Sep 14, 2021 at 9:01 AM Rob Sargent <robjsarg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > ORMs a function of poor development culture and vendor advocacy, not > > the fault of SQL. If developers don't understand or are unwilling to > > use joins in language A, they won't in language B either. > > Back in the day, within IBM there were two separate relational databases. > System-R (which came from San Hose) and PRTV (the Peterlee Relational Test > vehicle). As I understand it SQL came from System-R and the optimizer > (amongst other things) came from PRTV. > > PRTV > (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Peterlee_Relational_Test_Vehicle_(PRTV)) > did not use SQL, and was never a released product, except with a graphical > add-on which was sold to two UK local authorities for urban planning. > > So there are (and always have been) different ways to send requests to a > relational DB, it is just that SQL won the day. > > Ah, lets not forget Mr Lane's favourite: quel
Sure, I quite like, er, liked quel also, being more mathematical and formal. It's a shame it didn't make the cut. This is however a telling example that standardization trumps purity once languages hit a certain spot. There are many languages with dumb things that will never get fixed :-). As they say, 'the devil you know'. QUEL also uses idiomatic english for most operations, which I guess is probably a contributing factor for developer resistance to SQL, since native speakers are a minority of the earth's population. Oh well. merlin
