if you don't believe that adding more structure to the absolute maniacal catastrophe that is sql is a good thing then i'm going to start to have doubts about your authenticity as a human being

[–] QuazarOmega@lemy.lol 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (13 children)

Me trying to remember on whose output data having, count, sum, etc. work

Once you know functions you would have no reason to go back.
I propose we make SQL into this:

const MAX_AMOUNT = 42, MIN_BATCHES = 2

database
    .from(table)
    .where(
        (amount) => amount < MAX_AMOUNT,
        table.field3
    )
    .select(table.field1, table.field3)
    .group_by(table.field1)
    .having(
        (id) => count(id) >MIN_BATCHES
        table.field0
    )

(Sorry for any glaring mistakes, I'm too lazy right now to know what I'm doing)

..and I bet I just reinvented the wheel, maybe some JavaScript ORM?

[–] expr@programming.dev 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (2 children)

Because you never learned SQL properly, from the sound of it.

Also, ORMs produce trash queries and are never expressive enough.

[–] emptyother@programming.dev 3 points 2 years ago

ORMs produce good queries if you know what you do. Which requires proper knowledge of SQL, unfortunately.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (11 replies)

load more comments (18 replies)