David Gould wrote:
>
> I haven't read the PL/SQL proposal yet so please do not take this as
> criticism of the proposal. It is just that I have sometimes wondered (having
> used and maintained a couple of them) if there is a real need to invent
> another procedural language inside a dbms. Who really needs yet another
> language that only works in certain special circumstances?
But Jan has already adopted an existing language interpreter (i.e. TCL).
Now he speaks about server side programing using native SQL.
Actually existance of SQL server programming in SQL database seems to be
quite expected feature. You may consider that most SQL developers
doesn't really need other languages but SQL, so it's not inventing
another language. It's just a wider, more flexible implementation of
internal SQL.
Mike
--
WWW: http://www.lodz.pdi.net/~mimo tel: Int. Acc. Code + 48 42 148340
add: Michal Mosiewicz * Bugaj 66 m.54 * 95-200 Pabianice * POLAND