Can't say I really took it as a "You-Might-Not-Be-Smart-Enough" sort of thing. And even if it was, it really wouldn't bother me much. For one, generally speaking, I'm pretty careful about my table joins. For two, specifically speaking, I can point to a couple instances where I've annoyed the heck out of a DBA by forgetting to join a couple of million+ record tables before running the query.
Point is, mistakes happen and if a particular method can help prevent them, that's worth keeping in mind. Should it be the only concern? Certainly not, but other factors being more or less equal, I'm all for something that will keep a minor mistake into becoming a larger problem. Anyway, thanks for the responses, all. Matt -----Original Message----- From: Ken Ferguson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 11:33 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: SQL prob Once again, someone pops in with this reason for doing something. It troubles me that this manner of thinking is so prevalent, as it most certainly means it's come about from actual experiences dealing with people. I don't feel that this sort of because-you-might-not-be-smart-enough type of argument is a good reason to do anything one way or another. I'm not taking a shot at you here Dave, far from it, but it seems that every time someone asks "why shouldn't I do x this way," someone points out that a good reason has to do with the fact that people won't be able to do it right or won't be able to understand... Are people getting LESS capable out there or are we just accepting their (I should say "our" to include myself or just drop the possessive altogether) inadequacies more willingly or what? On the other hand, I suppose we could be ascribing inadequacies to people unfairly, though I rather doubt it. My argument on these type of things is always along the lines of "do it the way it works and performs best and if someone else isn't smart/good/experienced enough to 'get it' then they should learn more." Does this bother anyone else, or is it just me? It could easily be just me; I've had it up to here with people in general this morning. If it is, maybe I should just hit the power button and take the rest of the day. --Ferg -----Original Message----- From: Dave Watts [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 11:18 AM To: CF-Talk Subject: RE: SQL prob One advantage of explicit JOIN syntax is that it eliminates the possibility of an accidental Cartesian product or cross join. If you have a query with three or four tables joined within the WHERE clause, you might forget one of your joins and the query will run successfully, but will fetch a Cartesian product (which you typically don't want, and which will typically annoy your DBA). If you use explicit JOIN syntax, you will get an error message if you forget a join, which is a much better result. Personally, I prefer explicit JOIN syntax because I find it a bit easier to read, although admittedly I used to find the old syntax easy to read as well. Dave Watts, CTO, Fig Leaf Software http://www.figleaf.com/ Fig Leaf Software provides the highest caliber vendor-authorized instruction at our training centers in Washington DC, Atlanta, Chicago, Baltimore, Northern Virginia, or on-site at your location. Visit http://training.figleaf.com/ for more information! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Logware (www.logware.us): a new and convenient web-based time tracking application. Start tracking and documenting hours spent on a project or with a client with Logware today. Try it for free with a 15 day trial account. http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=67 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:4:201521 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/4 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:4 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.4 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
