Comments
Sort by recent activity
You have to put stuff like this in brackets: IF (@qwe > 0)
BEGIN
..
..
..
END -- IF (@qwe > 0)
ELSE
BEGIN
I am assuming you mean the comments. I like ths comment idea. This would be especially useful for newsgroup posts from dyslexic programmers (which for me is a large value of this tool.) Too often code has twenty layers of code that is just impossible to read. / comments
You have to put stuff like this in brackets:IF (@qwe > 0)
BEGIN
..
..
..
END -- IF (@qwe > 0)
ELSE
BEGIN
I am assuming you mean the comments. I like ths ...
I agree. This would be really really nice when writing. I spend a large part of the time I am writing trying to format code. And most publishers have a given style. This would be excellent. / comments
I agree. This would be really really nice when writing. I spend a large part of the time I am writing trying to format code. And most publishers have a given style. This would be excellent.
I don't mind it popping up, or even guessing what thing I might want to use. The problem is that if I don't use it, it shouldn't get in my way. So far it seems very fast, my only real interface usability issue is that it gets in the way when I don't need it, and it should be benign, requiring me to make use of what it is doing. / comments
I don't mind it popping up, or even guessing what thing I might want to use. The problem is that if I don't use it, it shouldn't get in my way. So far it seems very fast, my only real interface u...
I know that several people I work with use them extensively for ETL because we have some databases that a misguided person installing a certain product in dev, qa, preprod, etc thought it would be good to rename the database for the environment it is in, so we use them to vary the synonym rather than the code.
So synonyms would be definitely used. / comments
I know that several people I work with use them extensively for ETL because we have some databases that a misguided person installing a certain product in dev, qa, preprod, etc thought it would be ...
* Do you like the ability to filter the candidates by type? (CTRL plus LEFT ARROW or RIGHT ARROW)
Very good. (and I love that it shows the code of an object like a function. I have to lookup the text way too often. If you could make that copyable, that would just be awesome (I often code a usage sample into the code that might include other objects.)
* Is it the right size to start off with?
Fine with me.
* Does it work the way you think it should?
Pretty much. Nothing should be selected by default though. Too easy to hit the key and insert useless code.
* Does it show all the information you need about a candidate? E.g. showing the type information for columns.
I would probably want to sort by table, maybe even hierarchially. A column doesn't stand alone very well. Type would be nice, and especially any relationships it might be a part of would be cool.
* Are there any other key combinations that you think we should cater for?
I would say that I would like a key that has no other meaning to activate the list specially, rather than spacebar. You don't want the tool to feel "intrusive" but available at a tap of the key.
Unfortunately, the ability to view the object owners/schemas didn’t make it into the beta, but we do want to do this - any suggestions?
Already started a thread on this one. It is totally needed to sort out things like sys. objects at the very least. / comments
* Do you like the ability to filter the candidates by type? (CTRL plus LEFT ARROW or RIGHT ARROW)
Very good. (and I love that it shows the code of an object like a function. I have to lookup the t...
I second that motion. That would be a very cool feature! / comments
I second that motion. That would be a very cool feature!
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. / comments
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 t...
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 [image] 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. / comments
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 t...
>>In the next beta we will try to resolve the schema based on the default schema of the current user.<<
That is a good start, but I think you ought to include underlines to warn us that you made a guess (and why would be nice). If there was only one table named tableName, then no worries. But if you used the one in my schema, but there was another, this is likely what I want, but not necessarily. A warning that that is the case would be really nice. / comments
>>In the next beta we will try to resolve the schema based on the default schema of the current user.<<
That is a good start, but I think you ought to include underlines to warn us that you made a ...
I agree. Even on my laptop server (with only a few databases) it takes about a minute. At the very least some indication that something is taking place would be nice. / comments
I agree. Even on my laptop server (with only a few databases) it takes about a minute. At the very least some indication that something is taking place would be nice.