Geoff Worboys wrote:

>>Nope. I just don't know anyone seriously interested to
>>implement this. Personally, I wouldn't give it a high
>>priority. BTW, is there anything else than Sybase which
>>supports such a feature? Oracle allows column aliases in
>>the ORDER BY clause only, and considering available ORDER
>>BY <ordinal> this doesn't look as a very nice improvement.
>>
>>
>
>I dont know of any systems that do it, but I still think it
>would be a good idea. I've seen questions about column
>aliases and their lack of relevance in SQL on the IBObjects
>and other lists.
>
>

Gosh, guys, even Netfrastructure allows unrestricted use of aliases.
Otherwise, what's the point of having aliases in the first place?

>It strikes most new-comers, and some longer standing people
>like myself, rather strange that SQL should be able to give
>a column an alias and then never be able to use that alias
>in the rest of the SQL statement.
>
>
>

It doesn't strike me a strange -- nothing about SQL strikes me as
strange any more. It does strike me as almost pointless to allow
aliases but not use them.

Pass1 is probably my leasat favorite module -- it always feels like I'm
about to catch some awful disease even having it open in an editor. But
I will take a look to see if three or four strategic lines of code will
have the oversight.


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]