Jesus died at 33, so that can't get returned in the query response lol
this post was submitted on 26 Oct 2023
286 points (96.4% liked)
SQL - any and all
305 readers
1 users here now
For discussion about SQL and databases. All versions welcome.
- MSSQL
- PostgreSQL
- MariaDB
- SQLite
- etc...
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
But you’re not 25, you’re 25 and 11 months you can’t have your cake and eat it too.
If it’s the same way for other age base restrictions, you are now contradicting your original comments point… it’s between 25 to 30, so 25, 25 and a day, and 25 and 364 days would all be included.
Unrelated question but why can't one have a cake and eat it? Presumably that's why you'd own a cake in the first place. Or is world filled with people eating other people's cakes but no owner is ever allowed to. Such a mysterious saying....
The easiest way to parse the meaning is to reverse the statement order, i.e. "Can't eat your cake and have it too." If you ate it, you wouldn't have it. If you have it, you haven't eaten it. The two states are mutually exclusive.
Okay, that makes sense, just weird choice of words.
Totally agree. I've never been a fan of the saying and it only clicked properly for me when I heard it explained with the statement reversal.
I’m an adult and go just drive and buy a cake anytime I want. I think it comes from you buy a cake to share, you are supposed to buy “a slice/piece” for yourself?
I don't know but it doesn't make sense. The saying, that is.
Huh, it just clicked.
If you eat your cake you no longer have it, and to have a cake you can’t eat it.
Doesn't make a lot of sense to me still.
That phrase is about fancy cakes, like wedding cake art. You can't keep the art and eat the cake. Like the food network cake competitions, some of those things are super creative, but you can't have the art and eat the cake.
It's like painting custom wrapping paper, or printing on toilet paper. If the purpose of something is to be consumed or destroyed, it can't do that and look good at the same time. You have to choose between having pretty mocha art and drinking a mocha.
I'm not contradicting anything. I think someone who's 25 years and 11 months should not be returned from the query. Hence, the strict inequality
But you absolutely are contradicting yourself…..
they are between the ages of 25 and 30 meaning your information would be incorrect or wrong… and it’s not even a debate since they are in fact between he age range.
It’s like saying 25.2 isn’t part of 25, and that’s not up for debate, and if it is well you’re not here to discuss in good faith now are you?
Okay, since you're starting to throw insults via this angle, let's try to make my case via a different route
Do you think the db is storing your age as an int or as a float? We know from the given information that it is stored as a singular number
So, I'm assuming it's as an int, which means that until you're 26, you're still 25. If you're 25 and 11 months, that's still 25 years old, and stored as such. The strict inequality should therefore not put it in the range 25 < X < 30
If it’s a singular number and not a rounded number. Which we could also assume here…. The number 25 would always be between 25 and 30, if you’re using rounded numbers, there is a possibility that 25 wouldn’t be between 25 and 30 since you would need to account for 24.5 and greater numbers rounded to it.
And with age, you never round up. So according to these well established rules over time. What could it be other than included in “between 25-30” unless it’s not age or a rounded number which you don’t do for age?
Okay, wait, what do you think the word "between" means?
I explained that if you wouldn’t take a small section out of context.
I don't. This is the crux of the argument
The integer 25 does not lie in the open interval (25,30). And someone with at least 25 years on him but not yet 26 has an integer age of 25.
Again, we're no working with the normal Euclidean topology here, but with the Euclidean topology projected on the integers
That’s a whole lot of words for, “I was caught contradicting and lying and now am now talking out of my ass”
The crux of the argument was explained using all possible outcomes, and you still can’t comprehend it. It’s not an integer it’s age, if you’ve stored it as an integer, you’ve done fucked up in every way possible.
You accused me of not talking in good faith before, but I'm not the one throwing insults.
Since you seem unwilling to discuss this any further, I'll halt the conversation too