Re: Rules: A Modest Proposal

On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 6:42 PM, David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> wrote:
>> I agree that rules, except for SELECT rules, don't seem to be very
>> useful.  Perhaps others have found them so, but I have found
>> triggers to be a better fit for everything that I ever want to do.
>> Every time I think, hmm, maybe I could use a rule for that, I reread
>> the chapter and change my mind.
>
> It's people who either don't read the chapter or don't change their
> mind who get in all that trouble.  Actually using RULEs is just
> cruisin' for a bruisin'.

Well, it's not our custom to tailor our feature set to people who
aren't willing or able to read the instructions. If we're going to
start removing all the features that will bite you in the posterior in
such cases, can we start with NOT IN and the application of IS NULL/IS
NOT NULL to records? Because I'd bet good money those bite VASTLY
more people than anything involving rules.

> As for the upgrades, you've made an interesting point.  I suspect that
> for the cases mentioned, there could be a mechanical way to do what
> needs doing.

Only if the new system is pretty darn similar to how the existing
system works. But at this point this is all hand-waving, as we have
no design for anything that could replace what we have now even for
the use cases you think are important (which I'm also unconvinced
cover what everyone else thinks are important, but that's a separate
issue).

...Robert