At 08:27 09/06/2015, you wrote: ???? >Andl is at a slightly higher level than SQL for writing simple queries. >Where it shines is writing complex queries that involve user-defined >types, >custom transformations and custom aggregations. For complex relational >operations there is nothing I know that can come close, productivity >wise. `---
You call for complexity, you get it! What I would find pretty convincing is seeing how andl would translate the self-contained sudoku solver posted by E. Pasma in this post: http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/sqlite-users/2014-March/051982.html Granted, this is far from the typical SQL you can find in routine use, but I believe that andl being able to elegantly translate it would certainly impress a number of readers and make many of us more interested in digging further. I'm not throwing such a mayhem challenge at you in the tone of "if andl can't do that, then shut up". Maybe andl is not yet complete enough today to achieve that and this wouldn't be a big issue. But if it can I'm sure andl will attract more attention. JcD
