LayOut comments

• 
  Here's another one:
  

  select  col1,
          col2,
          col3 as blah
  from    tbla
  cross join
  (
  	select col1, col2, col3
  	from tblb
  ) x
  

  
  ... becomes:
  

  select  col1,
          col2,
          col3 as blah
  from    tbla
          cross join ( select col1,
                              col2,
                              col3
                       from   tblb
                     ) x
  

  
  But what I want is (based on the current behavior of the product in other cases):
  

  select  col1,
          col2,
          col3 as blah
  from    tbla
  cross join 
  ( 
          select  col1,
                  col2,
                  col3
          from   tblb
  ) x
  

  amachanic August 29, 2006 11:25

  - 0 +
• 
  It's rare that I disagree with Adam, but I dont favor this output:
  

  select  * 
  from    tbla 
  join tblb on tbla.id = tblb.id
  

  
  I hate this too though (in fact I would rather have his suggestion than this)
  

  select  * 
  from    tbla 
             join tblb on tbla.id = tblb.id
  

  
  I always do it this way, because I don't feel that a JOIN is on the same level as the FROM clause
  

  select  * 
  from    tbla 
                 join tblb 
                      on tbla.id = tblb.id
                 join tblc 
                        join tblcsCousin
                                on tblcsCousin.id = tblc.id
                      on tblc.id = tblb.id
  

  
  
  This is however, one thing I am really looking forward to with your tool. I get some code, click a button and bam, it is in my style, then he gets it and can do the same thing.
  
  I think it is imperative that the output be as configurable as possible, with every concievable (and reasonable) possibility.

  drsql August 30, 2006 23:43

  - 0 +
• 

  drsql wrote:

  ...
  I think it is imperative that the output be as configurable as possible, with every concievable (and reasonable) possibility.

  
  We are trying . At the moment we have almost thirty options, and many of the suggested options mentioned on this forum will make it into the final release. But of course for every option added there will be five more waiting to be considered.
  
  Thank you for the option suggestions, we will consider them and if time permits include many of them.
  
  Andras

  Andras B August 31, 2006 06:18

  - 0 +
• 
  I didn't realize it, but it lost my formatting:
  

  select * 
  from tbla 
           join tblb 
                on tbla.id = tblb.id 
           join tblc 
               join tblcsCousin 
                    on tblcsCousin.id = tblc.id 
             on tblc.id = tblb.id
  

  
  I will edit the original post too.

  drsql August 31, 2006 09:53

  - 0 +
• 

  drsql wrote:

  I didn't realize it, but it lost my formatting:
  

  select * 
  from tbla 
           join tblb 
                on tbla.id = tblb.id 
           join tblc 
               join tblcsCousin 
                    on tblcsCousin.id = tblc.id 
             on tblc.id = tblb.id
  

  
  I will edit the original post too.

  
  Many thanks,
  Andras

  Andras B August 31, 2006 10:19

  - 0 +
• 
  I'm not sure how difficult it would be (probably really, really difficult), but if you wanted the ultimate formatter, you could give the user several sample SQL fragments (enough to get a consistent baseline), and let the user reformat them however he or she sees fit. Then the rules engine could evaluate the reformatted SQL and come up with rules that would conform with it (or, set the available options appropriately). Probably far in the future of the product, but perhaps something to start thinking about

  amachanic August 31, 2006 14:01

  - 0 +
• 

  amachanic wrote:

  I'm not sure how difficult it would be (probably really, really difficult), but if you wanted the ultimate formatter, you could give the user several sample SQL fragments (enough to get a consistent baseline), and let the user reformat them however he or she sees fit. Then the rules engine could evaluate the reformatted SQL and come up with rules that would conform with it (or, set the available options appropriately). Probably far in the future of the product, but perhaps something to start thinking about

  
  Well, as many times, you are absolutely right. It does sound like a very interesting idea. While it is not possible to deduct all the preferred settings from a set of indented scripts, the tool could potentially show some learning qualities, and if its own indentation is "corrected" by the user, it could adapt.
  This of course is way beyound the scope of the first version. We have not included all the refactorings in the CTP, there is more in the queue. The more popular ones will get more resources in the future. If it happens to be the SQL Layout, the above way of extension could become reality.
  
  Regards,
  Andras

  Andras B September 01, 2006 03:39

  - 0 +
• 
  I could not find a way to keep the column list on GROUP BY and ORDER BY on their own lines. It currently changes my code to this:
  
  select sum(sp.qty) as qty
  , e.territory_number
  from sample_product sp
  join enrollment e on sp.nah_customer_id = e.nah_customer_id
  where sp.tracking_form_date >= '2006-1-9 00:00:00.000'
  group by
  e.territory_number
  order by
  e.territory_number
  
  But I would like to have the columns on the group by and order by columns on the same line as the reserved word. I also wish the JOIN statement would line up with SELECT, FROM, WHERE, GROUP BY and ORDER BY. I cannot understand why it is indented. Perhaps I am missing something.
  
  select sum(sp.qty) as qty
  , e.territory_number
  from sample_product sp
  join enrollment e on sp.nah_customer_id = e.nah_customer_id
  where sp.tracking_form_date >= '2006-1-9 00:00:00.000'
  group by e.territory_number
  order by e.territory_number

  schaitel September 07, 2006 13:47

  - 0 +
• 
  I wants "Same JOINs & ONs indent formating" too

  SELECT * 
  FROM dbo.t1 
           INNER JOIN 
               dbo.t2 
           ON dbo.t1.id = dbo.t2.id 
               INNER JOIN 
                   dbo.t3
                       INNER JOIN 
                           dbo.t4 
                       ON dbo.t3.id = dbo.t4.id 
               ON dbo.t2.t4_id = dbo.t4.id 
  

  EloyOrion September 07, 2006 14:48

  - 0 +

Add comment

Please sign in to leave a comment.