Field And Record

Kevin Feasel

2016-04-21

Naming

Michael Swart introduces Field & Record magazine:

I’m definitely a descriptivist. Language is always changing and if a word or phrase gets adopted widely enough, it is no longer “wrong” (whatever that means).

So when I hear “Field” and “Record” they’re acceptable to me. But if I’m explaining something, I don’t want to distract from the thing I’m saying. And from that point of view, I try to use “Row” and “Column” because I don’t know anyone who blinks at those terms.

Entity and Attribute or bust.  That’s my philosophy.

Related Posts

Singular or Plural Table Names

Ed Elliott kicks a hornet’s nest: There is a lot of confusion when it comes to designing tables in SQL Server around whether to pluralize names or not. How do you choose whether to pluralize or not? If we want to store a list of people and their details do we use “Person”, “Persons”, “People” […]

Read More

Against Hard-Coded Database Names In Queries

Kevin Feasel

2019-03-19

Naming

Kendra Little explains why hard-coding database names in your stored procedures or views is a bad idea: I’m terrible at naming things. I recently wrote some quick code to reproduce a design problem and demonstrate several options for solutions, and later realized that I’d named my objects dbo.Foo, dbo.FooFoo, and dbo.Wat. But I feel strongly […]

Read More

Categories

April 2016
MTWTFSS
« Mar May »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930