I would reject this pull request. Why is the indenting all over the place? Why is your keyword capitalisation all over the place? WHY YELLOW?!
Edit: the more I look at this the more it pisses me off. Wtf is going on with your kerning? Just random number and placement of spaces. Also, why is the table name in caps? Who does that? Select * is lazy. Do you really need every field about a girl? Really? Worst of all, not a limited request. I sware this is just the kind of thing that would return 30 million rows and brick the database for twenty seconds.
You forgot some: Why is there no space after SELECT?
Why are boyfriend and smallwaist not questions like is_cute and is_crazy? Either all boils are with a verb or none.
Also why is smallwaist not in snake case? It should be small_waist (or better yet has_small_waist or even better waist = “small”)
Also also boyfriend should be null not false, this would solve multiple issues.
And finally the only positive thing is the * itself, because selecting only body would be even worse. 🤣
You are now a Certified Rejector. Stay sharp, keep the wheel rolling.
I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Shouldn’t boyfriend be a reference to another table?
BF has no referential integrity
That’s (part of) why it should be a separate table to map the relation “Relationship”. People can have more than one (polyamory, infidelity), and you could track fields like the start, end, status (e.g. flirting, dating, committed, engaged, married, ended) in there.
One of the reasons women will find this repugnant is because they didn’t normalize their tables. Should be
boyfriend_id is null
.For that matter, why is waist size a Boolean?
They allowed business logic to pollute the DB table, and “small waist” is a defined range in some confluence doc somewhere.
deleted by creator
And why is cuteness and craziness binary?
Why is there a separate table for men and women in the first place? Shouldn’t there be a person table with a many to many relationship with itself (because polyamory exists)?
To that point a person table with a relationship table. So this way you can reference relationship between two or more persons within the relationship table and that could be joined to the person table if needed. I don’t think you’d really be able to keep it within one table while exploring multiple relationships unless you’re storing a list of ids that is interpreted outside of sql. Also a relationship table would allow exploring other types of relationships such as exes, love interests, coworkers, family, friends, etc
Yeah it’d be a person table, and the relationship table indicating the ids of shipped couples. Do you think there’d need to be a status in the relationship table so we can tombstone exes? Or maybe started and ended date columns for each relationship so we can figure out whose cheating on who. But when about on-off relationships then? How would we model Ross and Rachel?
That structure doesn’t handle polyamorous and cheating relationships very well. It should probably have
and (select top 1 1 from dbo.relationships r where r.partner_a != GIRLS.id or r.partner_b != GIRLS.id)
which would handle also LGBT+ relationships or relationships that are better represented as a graph.Muuuum, the programmers escaped again.
Guy with a belly asks for girl with a small waist. The half-assed ugly shirt will do it.
Instant woman repellant.
I feel confident in assuming the guy who would wear this shirt seeking “girls” between the ages of 18 and 26 is himself no younger than 45.
And married.
Ah I missed the age gap.
Would this guy qualify as an OUTER JOIN? (Sorry, SQL is not my native language)
I sure wouldn’t want him as an INNER JOIN
yesss I’m 42 so I can wear this shirt with pride!
At least he’s wearing the red flag on the outside.
Gonna sound racist but deal with it.
I constantly meet asian developers (Singapore , India, China, etc) with this edgelord personality. They come to American conferences and meetups, say some wild sexist shit, and someone has to politely let them know not to.
Some backtrack. Some apologize. Some literally freeze up and pretend like it didn’t happen.
We do still live in a bubble in the west. We’re fighting for equity across genders and race, while some parts of the world are still questioning if sexual harassment against women at work is really that big of a deal.
ERROR: permission denied for “GIRLS”
This is why we have codes of conduct.
Should be
age > (my_age / 2) +7
Why would there be an age and my_age column on the table GIRLS?
Because for each girl you meet, you might tell her a different age.
Good point.
Should be
age > (@my_age / 2) +7
FTFOP - now my age is some value defined outside the immediate query.
More likely, the GIRLS would be a view of some table persons and you could query
my_age
from that table too.Thank you. I assumed the reader would be educated enough to guess I meant a variable. But yeah, should used @my_age
Pretty sure “People who know enough about SQL to know about variables” is a subset of “People who know enough about SQL to be pedantic about it” :p
A fair point :D
Or (my_age - 7) * 2 < age < (my_age / 2) +7`
Uh, no no. The rule is “half my age plus seven”. I’ve no idea what your other term is supposed to represent.
He’s saying it goes both ways. The upper limit is a women who you would be half her age plus 7.
That is really a shirt for SQL enthusiast. Now, I want to rebuild the database and write some convention for writing request.