zlacker

> The point of SQL pipe syntax is that there is no reordering.

If you're referring to this in the comment you're replying to:

> Can we call this SQL anymore after this? This re-ordering of things ...

Then they're clearly just saying that this is a reordering compared to SQL, which is undeniably true (and the while point).

>>quietb+(OP)
The post I was referring to said that this new pipe syntax was a big reordering compared to the vanilla syntax, which it is. But my point is that if you're going to understand the vanilla syntax, you already have to do this reordering in your head because the order in which the the vanilla syntax executes (inside out) is the order in which pipes syntax reads. So it's just easier all around to adopt the pipe syntax so that reading and execution are the same.