Actually, getting the "from" first makes a lot MORE sense IMO, and you
can see how this allows everything that follows to make better use of
intellisense etc; how can it tell you what you can select if you
haven't told it what you are talking about first?

Hi,

Have you stopped to think that maybe the way you always did it is not the
correct one?

Teddy,

For me is SQL always been a very difficult dialect to understand. (I was
already a devellopper before the time it was created, therefore I learned it
never on school).

From the start all languages were describing what to take and then what to
do with it. And that always from the top to the bottom.

In the seventies there came as SQL meant as an enduser scripting language to
be in Plain English  (whatever that distincts that "Plain" from real English
are in my idea words as Drop, Truncate and things as that). For the latter,
I am not an Englishman and as somebody here from the area of the real Oxford
tells me that it is plain English, then I believe him of course.

However, for me (as an old developper from before the start of SQL) has SQL
forever been the most unlogical developper language that was ever designed.

Just my 2 cents.

Cor

teddysnips@hotmail.com kirjoitti:

Well SQL is based (mainly) or relational algebra, and in relational
algebra you would tell this

Project(CompanyName,
   Restrict(City='London',
      Customers))

Which is a little bit closer to the way you say in SQL. So yes, SQL
(almost) makes sence.

--
Arto Viitanen