Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!mtxinu!sybase!jeffl@sybase.Sybase.COM
From: jeffl@sybase.Sybase.COM (Jeff Lichtman)
Newsgroups: comp.databases
Subject: Re: SQL Standardization
Message-ID: <4527@sybase.sybase.com>
Date: 3 Jun 89 04:15:25 GMT
References: <1120@ethz.UUCP>
Sender: news@sybase.sybase.com
Lines: 18

> 1. Has any vendor out there (Oracle, RTI, Sybase, ... ) actually
>    implemented the module language discussed in [Date 87], Section 3.2,
>    as an alternative to embedded SQL?

No, and I don't think anyone ever will.  The module language was an attempt
by the ANSI committee to bypass language embedding issues.  In SQL 86
(the first standard) they came up with a least common denominator of the
major existing systems, and tried to avoid sticky problems.  Instead of
trying to make embeddings part of the standard, they came up with a whole
new abstraction.  The embeddings were put in an appendix that wasn't
officially part of the standard.

SQL 89, a superset of SQL 86, has language embeddings as an official part
of the standard.  I expect the module language to eventually disappear.
---
Jeff Lichtman at Sybase
{mtxinu,pacbell}!sybase!jeffl  -or- jeffl@sybase.com
"Saints should always be judged guilty until they are proved innocent..."