ADQL/XML non compliance with SQL?
cgp at star.le.ac.uk
Mon Feb 9 07:08:59 PST 2004
On Mon, 9 Feb 2004, Martin Hill wrote:
> WHERE (f OR f) AND (t OR t) = f
> is different from
> WHERE f OR (f AND t) OR t = t
As far as I can discover, the AND operator has higher precedence than OR
in SQL, as it does in most languages.
(I just tried to do a Google search on the operators AND and OR and it
didn't get me anywhere, I suppose I should have expected that :-).
> On another point, isn't XOR a standard SQL boolean operator?
Not as far as I can tell from DBMS manuals that I've looked at, but I
don't have access to an SQL Standard here.
Dept of Physics & Astronomy,
University of Leicester, Tel +44 116 252 3551
Leicester, LE1 7RH, U.K. Fax +44 116 252 3311
More information about the voql