this post was submitted on 01 Jul 2024
331 points (92.1% liked)
LinkedinLunatics
3590 readers
366 users here now
A place to post ridiculous posts from linkedIn.com
(Full transparency.. a mod for this sub happens to work there.. but that doesn't influence his moderation or laughter at a lot of posts.)
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Should be
age > (my_age / 2) +7Why would there be an age and my_age column on the table GIRLS?
Good point.
FTFOP - now my age is some value defined outside the immediate query.
More likely, the GIRLS would be a view of some table persons and you could query
my_agefrom that table too.Thank you. I assumed the reader would be educated enough to guess I meant a variable. But yeah, should used @my_age
Pretty sure "People who know enough about SQL to know about variables" is a subset of "People who know enough about SQL to be pedantic about it" :p
A fair point :D
Because for each girl you meet, you might tell her a different age.
Ah, but if we care at all about normalization and that's calculatable from the other columns (it should be) then it shouldn't be a column. Unless it's expensive and this is a view, of course.
Found the programmer thread that criticises the data model instead of the t-shirt
Or (my_age - 7) * 2 < age < (my_age / 2) +7`
Uh, no no. The rule is "half my age plus seven". I've no idea what your other term is supposed to represent.
He’s saying it goes both ways. The upper limit is a women who you would be half her age plus 7.
This "rule" only works for a small set of ages from 14 ~ 30ish
If you are 14 then the range for "age" is 14 - 14
If you are 30 then the range for "age" is 22 - 46
If you are 40 then the range for "age" is 27 - 66
At 30 the upper level is 16 years different; while it could work it is a big gap to bridge. It only gets worse the older you get.