RE: Anyone using the *READ Triggers - SQL

> From: jpcarr@tredegar.com
>
> I was saying bull to your presumptuousness of seeing 4-5 lines of code and
> then
> use that convenient code fragment to go off on your methodology of
> abstraction.

Why is that bull?  The code you showed had a weakness.  Hardcoded constants
are a standard problem in business, and embedding them in SQL views makes
re-engineering that much more difficult.  That's my opinion, and it's valid.
You don't like my opinion, fine, but don't jump down my throat.


> Weren't you the guy that said users don't own the data, that you do,
> and they shouldn't query it directly themselves right?

That's partially correct - users own the data, but should be insulated from
how the data is stored on the database.  Since when does a user decide
whether I use a VARYING field or not?  It's this level of separation that
people seem to have lost.


> Ah, I like SQL,  I use it,  I recommend people know it and use it.   That
> might grate on you too I don't know.
> The capabilities of SQL views compared to DDS LF's is night and day.  You
> can contest that if you want.
> It's so self-evident that I will not reply if you disagree.

SQL has pluses and minuses like any other tool.  I'm a big fan of embedded
SQL for query purposes.  I'm not a big fan of client-side SQL, because it
binds the client to the database and vice versa.  And I've been saying the
exact same thing for years.  People like to slam me as anti-SQL, when in
reality I'm simply against client-side business logic.


> I guess you don't think someone can say "Respectfully,  bullhunky"

Not with the tone you're using, no.  It's not respectful.  My opinion.


> I professionally disagree with your pontifications,  Not your soul.

What really frosts me is that I was very sure to mention that my opinion was
just that, it wasn't one size fits all, it was just something to think
about, and stil you come slamming down on me like I questioned your reason
for existing on this planet.  I'm sorry you consider this some sort of
attack on your integrity.  I simply consider it a difference of opinion on
programming.

Joe