On Sun, 22 Mar 2015 19:04:50 -0400 Stephen Chrzanowski <pontiac76 at gmail.com> wrote:
> What I'm gathering from Igor and Ryan is that even though the subquery > looks to be a self contained entity, it actually isn't? Right, it actually isn't. All the names mentioned in the outer query are in scope for the inner one $ sqlite3 :memory: <<EOF create table T (t int); insert into T values (1); select * from T where t in (select t); EOF t ---------- 1 The query establishes a lexical scope. They're visible within subqueries. It's similar to how in C global variables are visible within functions. --jkl > On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 6:27 PM, Igor Tandetnik <igor at tandetnik.org> > wrote: > > > On 3/22/2015 11:50 AM, Bart Smissaert wrote: > > > >> Still, in this particular case it seems odd as there is only one > >> column and > >> one table in the sub-select. > >> > > > > I'm not sure I understand what significance you ascribe to this > > fact. Why again should the number of columns or tables in subselect > > matter? > > > > -- > > Igor Tandetnik > > > > _______________________________________________ > > sqlite-users mailing list > > sqlite-users at mailinglists.sqlite.org > > http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users > > > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > sqlite-users at mailinglists.sqlite.org > http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
