Xref: utzoo comp.databases:2567 comp.lang.misc:2954 comp.software-eng:1537
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!pilchuck!ssc!fyl
From: fyl@ssc.UUCP (Phil Hughes)
Newsgroups: comp.databases,comp.lang.misc,comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: need help choosing between INGRESS and PROGRESS
Keywords: INGRESS, PROGRESS
Message-ID: <1932@ssc.UUCP>
Date: 16 May 89 23:23:25 GMT
References: <985@resource.UUCP> <309@viusys.UUCP> <24295@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Distribution: na
Organization: SSC, Inc., Seattle, WA
Lines: 27

In article <24295@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, steve@violet.berkeley.edu (Steve Goldfield) writes:
> I haven't used PROGRESS, but I can confirm the weakness
> of Ingres' report writer.
> 
> First of all, it is limited to a single retrieve

Yuck.  This is not a problem with Progress.  How can you have a
real relational database if you can't retrieve stuff from multiple tables?

> Second, there are no flags or, more generally, user-controlled
> variables to control flow in the report.

The same language is used with Progress to write screens and reports
(which I think is a real plus.)  It is a full blown programming language
and you can do virtually anything in it.  The only limitation that I don't
like is that there are no passed variables in call lists if you precompile
the called module.  You can, however, pass stuff in global variables
or compile at run time (or even build a new program and then run it all
within a report).

> Third, ...

Not a problem for the same reason as 2 above.

-- 
Phil Hughes, SSC, Inc. P.O. Box 55549, Seattle, WA 98155  (206)FOR-UNIX
    amc-gw!ssc!fyl or uunet!pilchuck!ssc!fyl or attmail!ssc!fyl