• QuazarOmega@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Me trying to remember on whose output data having, count, sum, etc. work

    Once you know functions you would have no reason to go back.
    I propose we make SQL into this:

    const MAX_AMOUNT = 42, MIN_BATCHES = 2
    
    database
        .from(table)
        .where(
            (amount) => amount < MAX_AMOUNT,
            table.field3
        )
        .select(table.field1, table.field3)
        .group_by(table.field1)
        .having(
            (id) => count(id) >MIN_BATCHES
            table.field0
        )
    

    (Sorry for any glaring mistakes, I’m too lazy right now to know what I’m doing)

    …and I bet I just reinvented the wheel, maybe some JavaScript ORM?

    • drathvedro@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 months ago

      No. The arrow function in where eliminates any possibility of using indexes. And how do you propose to deal with logical expressions without resorting to shit like .orWhereNot() and callback hell? And, most importantly, what about joins?

    • expr@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      Because you never learned SQL properly, from the sound of it.

      Also, ORMs produce trash queries and are never expressive enough.

      • QuazarOmega@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Because you never learned SQL properly, from the sound of it.

        You might be right, though, to be fair, I also keep forgetting syntax of stuff when I don’t use it very often (read SQL (._.`))

        Also, ORMa produce trash queries and are never expressive enough.

        I meant to say that I would like the raw SQL syntax to be more similar to other programming languages to avoid needing to switch between thinking about different flows of logic