Comments on: Why not much has been happening here http://gidden.net/tom/2006/07/09/excuse-for-laziness/ Fri, 04 May 2012 15:43:23 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: S. http://gidden.net/tom/2006/07/09/excuse-for-laziness/comment-page-1/#comment-15777 S. Wed, 28 May 2008 01:47:37 +0000 http://gidden.net/tom/2006/07/09/excuse-for-laziness/#comment-15777 :-) Let me know when you come to Paris next, and I'll buy you a glass of wine. :-)

Let me know when you come to Paris next, and I'll buy you a glass of wine.

]]> By: Tom Gidden http://gidden.net/tom/2006/07/09/excuse-for-laziness/comment-page-1/#comment-15761 Tom Gidden Mon, 26 May 2008 23:28:59 +0000 http://gidden.net/tom/2006/07/09/excuse-for-laziness/#comment-15761 Ah... just noticed we did two rounds of interview tests, and you came in the second round. That explains it. Ah... just noticed we did two rounds of interview tests, and you came in the second round. That explains it.

]]> By: Tom Gidden http://gidden.net/tom/2006/07/09/excuse-for-laziness/comment-page-1/#comment-15760 Tom Gidden Mon, 26 May 2008 23:27:58 +0000 http://gidden.net/tom/2006/07/09/excuse-for-laziness/#comment-15760 Didn't I ask you the one about finding non-matching rows? Usually solved with a NOT IN subquery, but done better with an OUTER JOIN and an IS NULL? Hmm... sloppy of me. Oh well, I stand corrected :) Didn't I ask you the one about finding non-matching rows? Usually solved with a NOT IN subquery, but done better with an OUTER JOIN and an IS NULL?

Hmm... sloppy of me. Oh well, I stand corrected :)

]]> By: S http://gidden.net/tom/2006/07/09/excuse-for-laziness/comment-page-1/#comment-15759 S Mon, 26 May 2008 23:04:40 +0000 http://gidden.net/tom/2006/07/09/excuse-for-laziness/#comment-15759 Well, after an archaeological mailbox expedition, it seems like I solved it using some weird UNION instead of the OUTER JOIN you expected. :) Maybe not a join, but the assignment didn't say anything about that. Well, after an archaeological mailbox expedition, it seems like I solved it using some weird UNION instead of the OUTER JOIN you expected. :)

Maybe not a join, but the assignment didn't say anything about that.

]]> By: Tom Gidden http://gidden.net/tom/2006/07/09/excuse-for-laziness/comment-page-1/#comment-15746 Tom Gidden Mon, 26 May 2008 07:43:33 +0000 http://gidden.net/tom/2006/07/09/excuse-for-laziness/#comment-15746 I seem to remember you missed the inverse outer join, ie. the one which gives you rows that don't match. :) I seem to remember you missed the inverse outer join, ie. the one which gives you rows that don't match. :)

]]> By: S http://gidden.net/tom/2006/07/09/excuse-for-laziness/comment-page-1/#comment-15742 S Mon, 26 May 2008 02:21:20 +0000 http://gidden.net/tom/2006/07/09/excuse-for-laziness/#comment-15742 Pah. My SQL answers were 100% correct. :-) Pah. My SQL answers were 100% correct. :-)

]]>