Pipe Syntax in SQL

>>legran+(OP)
Here is one example from the PDF:

    FROM r JOIN s USING (id)
    |> WHERE r.c < 15
    |> AGGREGATE sum(r.e) AS s GROUP BY r.d
    |> WHERE s > 3
    |> ORDER BY d
    |> SELECT d, s, rank() OVER (order by d)

Can we call this SQL anymore after this? This re-ordering of things has been done by others too, like PRQL, but they didn't call it SQL. I do think it makes things more readable.

>>Cianti+06
Yes, having |> isn't breaking SQL but rather enhancing it.

I really like this idea of piping SQL queries rather than trying to create the perfect syntax from the get go.

+1 for readability too.

>>pajeet+67
Honestly, it seems like a band-aid on legacy query language.

>>oxym0r+ei
SQL a legacy query language?

In order for a thing to be considered legacy, there needs to be a widespread successor available.

SQL might have been invented in the 70s but it's still going strong as no real alternative has been widely adopted so far - I'd wager that you will find SQL at most software companies today.

Calling it legacy is not realistic IMO.

>>lpapez+Dl
I mean kinda? It's legacy in the "we would never invent this as the solution to the problem domain that's today asked of it."

We would invent the underlying engines for sure but not the language on top of it. It doesn't map at all to how it's actually used by programmers. SQL is the JS to WebAssembly, being able to write the query plan directly via whatever language or mechanism you prefer would be goated.

It has to be my biggest pain point dealing with SQL, having to hint to the optimizer or write meta-SQL to get it to generate the query plan I already know I want dammit! is unbelievably frustrating.

>>Spivak+mF
> It's legacy in the "we would never invent this as the solution to the problem domain that's today asked of it."

I don't think that definition of legacy is useful because so many things which hardly anyone calls "legacy" fit the definition - for example: Javascript as the web standard, cars in cities and bipartisan democracy.

I think many of us would say that that none of these is an ideal solution for the problem being solved, but it's what we are stuck with and I cannot think anyone could call it "legacy systems" until a viable successor is widespread.

zlacker