Hacker News Reader

Comment by nonethewiser | Hacker News Reader

This is tangential but a new query language is inevitably based in the idea that SQL is deficient in some manner (hard, not ergonomic, whatever). More interestingly, it also implies that the countless alternatives aren't good enough either.

Is there an existing query language that anyone will argue is better than SQL? I have limited exposure on this, but if SQL is really not that good then I'd expect there to be a better one at this point. All the new entrants kinda suggest that maybe SQL isn't so bad after all. Even many noSQL db's use an SQL-like language (see PartiQL). I'm not that familiar with alternatives though.

View on HN

I think of it in the same way as JavaScript. Clearly, it has issues, but if you want to work on the web, it is what you have available. If you want to speak to Oracle/MySQL/SQL Server/Postgres database you are writing SQL. New entrants, could make a new language, but now they are fighting a battle on two fronts: the novel technology +query language.

> I think of it in the same way as JavaScript. Clearly, it has issues, but if you want to work on the web, it is what you have available.

And, interestingly, the approach they're taking here is similar to how folks have dealt with JS: introduce a transpiled language whose paradigms are close enough to the host language to feel familiar. Reminds me of CoffeeScript, actually (although if we're being honest, I couldn't stand CoffeeScript.)

I counter the argument that just because it is still around it is the best solution. Many things stick around just because of inertia, for example, the QWERTY keyboard.

You're comparing apples to oranges. Typing is much harder to relearn due to muscle memory. New well designed programming languages become quite popular quickly and go viral when they solve the right problems for developers.

SQL is a very sound querying language originally based on relational algebra and tuple relational calculus. Many attempts have been made in the past to come up with better syntax but they don't go far which might have to do with the fact that authors realize later that SQL is just a thin layer masquerading the mathematical concepts required to retrieve relational data and make certain assumptions without breaking set theory axioms.

One common mistake I see is that developers attempting to create an SQL replacement often approach it in the same mindset as creating yet another general purpose programming language.

Edit: The above is not in reference to PRQL. It's just my anecdotal experience working on several SQL engines, building ones from scratch and working in this domain for 15 yrs.

Then state the better solution.

Besides, I'm not saying it's the best because it's most common, or even that its the best at all. It just makes it difficult to understand the argument that SQL sucks when its so widely used and no one can agree on an alternative. Including in new databases which could opt for these "new and improved" variants.

I grant that there is a first-mover advantage and it's not easy to shift paradigms. That's a big factor. That's why I am honestly - not rhetorically - asking which query language is clearly better than SQL? And why do people keep making new challengers instead of backing something that's already better than SQL? There seems to be very little support for these query languages despite many people saying SQL sucks and they want a redo.

Big keyboard is keeping DVORAK down! In a fair world we’d all be typing NewQL faster with AI from our flying electric cars in a communist utopia.

The cross-silo synergy is strong in this one.

What countless alternatives? I can’t think of many, and believe me, I’ve looked hard!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com