Yeah, I know. But someone earlier said using the -ING form might be better grammar, which in that case should be english grammar.
/Oskar 2011/2/6 Fabio Maulo <[email protected]>: > Oskar, > when I talk about 'grammar' I mean the files HQL.g, HqlSqlWalker.g > and SqlGenerator.g > > On Sun, Feb 6, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Oskar Berggren <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> 2011/2/6 Patrick Earl <[email protected]>: >> > K, I'm going to throw a wrench in the works and add a couple options. >> > >> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Select_(SQL)#FETCH_FIRST_clause >> > >> > So, to recap: >> > >> > Option i: SKIPPING x TAKING y SELECT ... FROM ... WHERE ... ORDER BY ... >> > Option ii: SKIP x TAKE y SELECT ... FROM ... WHERE ... ORDER BY ... >> > Option iii: SELECT ... FROM ... WHERE ... ORDER BY ... SKIP x TAKE y >> > Option iv: SELECT ... FROM ... WHERE ... ORDER BY ... SKIPPING x TAKING >> > y >> >> >> > Option v: SELECT FIRST x SKIP y ... FROM ... WHERE ... ORDER BY ... >> > Option vi: SELECT TOP x SKIP y ... FROM ... WHERE ... ORDER BY ... >> >> Both of these seem confusing to me. Take the first 100 elements and >> then skip 30, i.e. returning row 31 up to 100, that is return 70 rows? >> >> >> Option iii seems natural to me - with skip/take close to order by, >> since order by is usually vital in this situtation. >> >> As for grammar.... SQL sounds like commands, not a narrative. We order >> the database to select some data from rows where this and that, we >> also order it to skip some rows and take others. In contract, we do >> not tell a story, where we describe how the db is selecting, ordering, >> and skipping. So the grammar in option iii seems correct to me. >> >> >> /Oskar > > > > -- > Fabio Maulo > >
