|
Michael Martin wrote: When we all know, my way is the only way.
there is always, "the highway".
|
|
|
|
|
LIMIT does make paging super easy. I know it's easier to do in SQL Server these days, but with LIMIT it's as easy as this:
SELECT * FROM mytable LIMIT 50, 50;
Assuming you're showing 50 records per page and currently viewing the second page.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
Personally, I'd rather dump SQL completely, and go for a binary interface that doesn't let idiots leave themselves wide open to SQL Injection - but that's just crazy talk!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: but that's just crazy talk
You're thinking way too progressive man. Might one wanna take time to cherish the old archaic way. This way we don't have to learn new concepts.
Jeremy Falcon
|
|
|
|
|
writing code that writes code which gets interpreted at runtime in a black box is the modern way.
|
|
|
|
|
I am sooooo tempted to have that as a sig!  
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
It'll never fly, Orville.
|
|
|
|
|
It's standardized since ISO SQL:2008 as the "FETCH FIRST" clause
And it's starting to get support too, it's at the moment supported by atleast IBM DB2, PostgreSQL, Microsoft SQL Server 2012 and Oracle 12c.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
Any organization is like a tree full of monkeys. The monkeys on top look down and see a tree full of smiling faces. The monkeys on the bottom look up and see nothing but assholes.
|
|
|
|
|
Jörgen Andersson wrote: "FETCH FIRST"
Isn't that only for cursors? Got a link to documentation?
|
|
|
|
|
Here[^]
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
Any organization is like a tree full of monkeys. The monkeys on top look down and see a tree full of smiling faces. The monkeys on the bottom look up and see nothing but assholes.
|
|
|
|
|
Learn something new everyday... 
|
|
|
|
|
Sad is the day when you don't.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
Any organization is like a tree full of monkeys. The monkeys on top look down and see a tree full of smiling faces. The monkeys on the bottom look up and see nothing but assholes.
|
|
|
|
|
Naturally, MS messed up again by putting it together with the ORDER BY clause
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
Any organization is like a tree full of monkeys. The monkeys on top look down and see a tree full of smiling faces. The monkeys on the bottom look up and see nothing but assholes.
|
|
|
|
|
I think the usage of TOP should be extended to include a SKIRT keyword to provide the OFFSET functionality.
|
|
|
|
|
And don't forget the REMOVE clause.
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
Any organization is like a tree full of monkeys. The monkeys on top look down and see a tree full of smiling faces. The monkeys on the bottom look up and see nothing but assholes.
|
|
|
|
|
That's applicable to the Basic Relational Architecture.
|
|
|
|
|
As is the Lookup Table
Wrong is evil and must be defeated. - Jeff Ello
Any organization is like a tree full of monkeys. The monkeys on top look down and see a tree full of smiling faces. The monkeys on the bottom look up and see nothing but assholes.
|
|
|
|
|
Marc Clifton wrote: Why, after all these years, is there still no standard for basic features of SQL
There is a standard, as others will probably have pointed out.
I've been using the ANSI 92 standard for personal projects; it is quite portable between different types of databases.
Marc Clifton wrote: And if you want to do something more complex
..then I would not ask the DAL to do so.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: I would not ask the DAL to do so
Exactly, that's an application responsibility.
|
|
|
|
|
Speaking as someone who started out in COBOL: If you want a database, write one.
The only reasons to use a database written by someone else are:
a: If you have to integrate data with another system (in which case, you put your feet up and let them write the database).
b: If you use one of the wussy languages that isn't COBOL.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Well this comes to mind 
|
|
|
|
|
Since the beginning of this year I've been building a woodworking shop in the basement. Done some minor stuff like a small table and some wood and stone turning. Now I want to do more elaborate stuff and have a strong gut feeling (fed by some mishaps) that a little bit more planning would be in order.
I found "SketchUp Maker" which is the free counter part to the SketchUp Pro version. It looks quite nice and even has templates for woodworking projects.
So is there anybody here with experience in using SketchUp Maker or with yet an alternative free tool to do some 3D designs.
Any specialised tool for woodworking would also be great even though all my searches were fruitless.
Cheers!
"I had the right to remain silent, but I didn't have the ability!"
Ron White, Comedian
|
|
|
|
|
I found it a bit annoying to get used to, but it is a good piece of software once you get going.
Two small tips, look at Ana White[^] [she has lots of good ideas and plans] and think about using a Kreg Pocket Jig for most of your joints [if the joint can be hidden this is the tool]
I've made some chairs and a table, last summer I floored the loft and I'm hoping to make some new beds for the girls.
If I could make anything, it would be this clock[^]. I saw an example a few weeks ago and it is wonderful.
|
|
|
|
|
Nagy Vilmos wrote: If I could make anything, it would be this clock[^].
Doesn't look too hard - except for the metal and wood bits
PooperPig - Coming Soon
|
|
|
|
|
The one I saw was at an Arts Fair and block said he'll make me one for £1,000. Maybe more depending on the wood. It'll take six months. Mrs Wife pulled me away at this point.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
