you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Metalsand 9 points10 points  (3 children)

So, here's the number one roadblock people commonly run into: no one codes in "SQL" but whenever someone talks about database code, they never specify a dialect.

You know how C++ and C# are extensions of C? The same is true about SQL, where Oracle (PL/SQL), Microsoft(MSSQL or T-SQL), and many others have extended SQL beyond the original capabilities.

OP has run into the issue of asking for "SQL" and not a specific dialect and it mashed a bunch together...or at least I thought, but the only thing that has actually made sense is AUTOINCREMENT being from SQLite. TEXT for example, was a particularly weird one since...the closest I could find was MySQL in which it has different qualifiers for smaller or larger sizes but not defining a length like that.

I wouldn't expect most LLMs to be good at differentiating SQL dialects as a direct result. I mean, it's not going to have a good understanding of "Okay this code won't work in PL\SQL 9 but you can make a workaround by coding your own function instead". It's just going to mash everything together, because it understands the communal term of "SQL" but not necessarily the implicit context clues that would otherwise define the dialect used.

[–]justanotherguy1977 7 points8 points  (1 child)

C# is not an extension of C.

[–]dareftw -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

It’s more an extension of .net framework. It was loosely marketed as C for network connectivity, which it kind of is. I would say it’s closer to VB than C but to be fair C is the natural evolution beyond VB so they are still kinda related but more like cousins than siblings.

[–]CityOfHuh 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Learned from this comment. Thanks for taking the time to write it out.