Fossil SCM
Fix typos in the "Thoughs On The Design Of Fossil" document. Ticket [e77e876caf3]
Commit
ce6b68ca6458ebd0a6da4c6b5c2db265a9d652c0
Parent
4943c0e50485b3b…
1 file changed
+3
-3
+3
-3
| --- www/theory1.wiki | ||
| +++ www/theory1.wiki | ||
| @@ -90,15 +90,15 @@ | ||
| 90 | 90 | |
| 91 | 91 | <h2>SQL Is A High-Level Scripting Language</h2> |
| 92 | 92 | |
| 93 | 93 | The second concern states that Fossil does not use a high-level scripting |
| 94 | 94 | language. But that is not true. Fossil uses SQL (as implemented by SQLite) |
| 95 | -as its scripting langauge. | |
| 95 | +as its scripting language. | |
| 96 | 96 | |
| 97 | 97 | This misunderstanding likely arises because people fail |
| 98 | 98 | to appreciate that SQL is a programming language. People are taught that SQL |
| 99 | -is a "query langauge" as if that were somehow different from a | |
| 99 | +is a "query language" as if that were somehow different from a | |
| 100 | 100 | "programming language". But they really are two different favors of the |
| 101 | 101 | same thing. I find that people do better with SQL if they think of |
| 102 | 102 | SQL as a programming language and each statement |
| 103 | 103 | of SQL is a separate program. SQL is a percular programming language |
| 104 | 104 | in that one uses SQL to specify <i>what</i> to computer whereas in |
| @@ -108,11 +108,11 @@ | ||
| 108 | 108 | is an extraordinary high-level programming language, but it is still |
| 109 | 109 | just a programming language. |
| 110 | 110 | |
| 111 | 111 | For certain types of problems, SQL has a huge advantage over other |
| 112 | 112 | programming languages because it is so high level and because it allows |
| 113 | -programmers to focuse more on the <i>what</i> and less of the <i>how</i> | |
| 113 | +programmers to focus more on the <i>what</i> and less of the <i>how</i> | |
| 114 | 114 | of a computation. In other words, |
| 115 | 115 | programmers tend to think about problems at a much higher level when |
| 116 | 116 | using SQL, can this can result in better applications. |
| 117 | 117 | SQL is also very dense. |
| 118 | 118 | In practice, this often means that a few |
| 119 | 119 |
| --- www/theory1.wiki | |
| +++ www/theory1.wiki | |
| @@ -90,15 +90,15 @@ | |
| 90 | |
| 91 | <h2>SQL Is A High-Level Scripting Language</h2> |
| 92 | |
| 93 | The second concern states that Fossil does not use a high-level scripting |
| 94 | language. But that is not true. Fossil uses SQL (as implemented by SQLite) |
| 95 | as its scripting langauge. |
| 96 | |
| 97 | This misunderstanding likely arises because people fail |
| 98 | to appreciate that SQL is a programming language. People are taught that SQL |
| 99 | is a "query langauge" as if that were somehow different from a |
| 100 | "programming language". But they really are two different favors of the |
| 101 | same thing. I find that people do better with SQL if they think of |
| 102 | SQL as a programming language and each statement |
| 103 | of SQL is a separate program. SQL is a percular programming language |
| 104 | in that one uses SQL to specify <i>what</i> to computer whereas in |
| @@ -108,11 +108,11 @@ | |
| 108 | is an extraordinary high-level programming language, but it is still |
| 109 | just a programming language. |
| 110 | |
| 111 | For certain types of problems, SQL has a huge advantage over other |
| 112 | programming languages because it is so high level and because it allows |
| 113 | programmers to focuse more on the <i>what</i> and less of the <i>how</i> |
| 114 | of a computation. In other words, |
| 115 | programmers tend to think about problems at a much higher level when |
| 116 | using SQL, can this can result in better applications. |
| 117 | SQL is also very dense. |
| 118 | In practice, this often means that a few |
| 119 |
| --- www/theory1.wiki | |
| +++ www/theory1.wiki | |
| @@ -90,15 +90,15 @@ | |
| 90 | |
| 91 | <h2>SQL Is A High-Level Scripting Language</h2> |
| 92 | |
| 93 | The second concern states that Fossil does not use a high-level scripting |
| 94 | language. But that is not true. Fossil uses SQL (as implemented by SQLite) |
| 95 | as its scripting language. |
| 96 | |
| 97 | This misunderstanding likely arises because people fail |
| 98 | to appreciate that SQL is a programming language. People are taught that SQL |
| 99 | is a "query language" as if that were somehow different from a |
| 100 | "programming language". But they really are two different favors of the |
| 101 | same thing. I find that people do better with SQL if they think of |
| 102 | SQL as a programming language and each statement |
| 103 | of SQL is a separate program. SQL is a percular programming language |
| 104 | in that one uses SQL to specify <i>what</i> to computer whereas in |
| @@ -108,11 +108,11 @@ | |
| 108 | is an extraordinary high-level programming language, but it is still |
| 109 | just a programming language. |
| 110 | |
| 111 | For certain types of problems, SQL has a huge advantage over other |
| 112 | programming languages because it is so high level and because it allows |
| 113 | programmers to focus more on the <i>what</i> and less of the <i>how</i> |
| 114 | of a computation. In other words, |
| 115 | programmers tend to think about problems at a much higher level when |
| 116 | using SQL, can this can result in better applications. |
| 117 | SQL is also very dense. |
| 118 | In practice, this often means that a few |
| 119 |