In <[🔎] h6l9af$4pe$1@ger.gmane.org>, Emanoil Kotsev wrote: >Yeah, somehow SQL does not seem to be really "S"tandard :-) The "S" in SQL stands/stood for "Structured". However, SQL has been standardized about 3 times, roughly the same number of times UNIX has been standardized. However, like UNIX, each implementation has many, many extensions that the uninformed or undisciplined commonly use. Also like UNIX, in places where the standard has undefined or implementation-defined behavior each implementation generally has consistent and predictable behavior that even disciplined, experienced users may end up expecting from an alternative implementation. In short, most SQL you will find is not strictly-conforming, just like most shell scripts and C/C++ programs. -- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. bss@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.