The heading saying "Simple (SPJ)" caught my eye, because I'm not sure SPJ has ever talked about simplicity in an especially referenceable way. Were you thinking of Rich Hickey's "Simple made Easy", or did SPJ do a presentation I missed out on?
Show HN: Prela – Purely Algebraic Relation Combinators
11–14 of 14 posts
Re: Show HN: Prela – Purely Algebraic Relation Combinators
#12The heading saying "Simple (SPJ)" caught my eye, because I'm not sure SPJ has ever talked about simplicity in an especially referenceable way. Were you thinking of Rich Hickey's "Simple made Easy", or did SPJ do a presentation I missed out on?
Select-Project-Join, not Simon Peyton Jones :)
Re: Show HN: Prela – Purely Algebraic Relation Combinators
#13The heading saying "Simple (SPJ)" caught my eye, because I'm not sure SPJ has ever talked about simplicity in an especially referenceable way. Were you thinking of Rich Hickey's "Simple made Easy", or did SPJ do a presentation I missed out on?
Select-Project-Join, not Simon Peyton Jones :)
Hah. Not sure I've ever seen relational algebra abbreviated that way, but yeah. It makes sense.
Re: Show HN: Prela – Purely Algebraic Relation Combinators
#14Earlier quoted context omitted.
Having control over the execution plan is super interesting ! This is a very common frustration when writing SQL. Do you think it would be possible to offer Prela as a direct interface to a relational database?
Yes, maybe not the language itself, but the ideas behind it. Tarski's Algebra of Relations is actually a better model for modern columns stores than the standard relational algebra, because a column is a binary relation from the primary key into its value.
It would be pretty easy to put a DuckDB data source into this code.
It might be pretty easy to use overloading to get special case implementations that form SQL queries progressively until the results need to be materialized as something like a dataframe for the function code to work on.