Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Some developer FAQ links need updating

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>,Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Troels Arvin <troels(at)arvin(dot)dk>,pgsql-docs(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Some developer FAQ links need updating
Date: 2004-10-15 16:53:01
Message-ID: 200410151653.i9FGr1G13296@candle.pha.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-docs
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
> > There is only one current standard SQL:2003 correct? The rest are 
> > considered deprecated?
> 
> The old ones are certainly not "deprecated".
> 
> Personally I find the newer versions to be suffering from uncontrolled
> feature bloat and committee-itis.

That was my feeling too.  I know many cases the older specifications
were clearer.

Anyway, I think the new "There are three versions of the SQL standard"
wording is OK.

-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

pgsql-docs by date

Next:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2004-10-18 01:10:24
Subject: Re: SQL 2003 conformance
Previous:From: Tom LaneDate: 2004-10-15 16:51:04
Subject: Re: Some developer FAQ links need updating

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group