So, i'm hanging out in news://comp.databases.ibm-db2, and along comes Joe Celko, who has written a few books on SQL. He knows his stuff, but his pompous style reminds me of Martin Gardner. Though Gardner's writing style aims to intrigue whereas Celko comes to teach.
Anyway, someone posted a comment on using dynamic sql to write a procedure for table creation. Celko responded like a child, the author came with his rejoinder, and Celko got on his soapbox.
The first comment bothered me, the second one got right to me, so i responded. Then he came back with another message that i find to be so funny, not so much in content, but that he actually responded. Or something like that.
First mistake: Refering to publication or teaching job as stamp of authority: After teaching SQL for 20+ years and writing six books on SQL, I disagree.
Second mistake: Sticking in sociopolitical comments to back-up his argument: My "Zen Master with a stick approach" bothers the current generation of whining kids with a sense of entitlement."
The funny thing is, i agree with his second statement.
That settles it, Joe Celko is an idiot, and i will (most likely) never by _his_ books.