The title did not refer to years passed since the introduction of SQL, but to years passed since the publication of the paper with the title "A Critique of the SQL Database Language", i.e. from 1984-11.
So the title is correct.
Title may be correct. First sentence is totally wrong. Why would I read further?
Author here. Fixed the mistake. You may now proceed with reading the remainder of the post ;)
Re:A Critique of SQL, 40 Years Later
by cryptonector on Wednesday August 24, 2022 @04:01PM
(#32584983)
It's off by two years. People often round 48 to 50. I don't mind TFA rounding 48 to 50; you seem to, so don't read it if you don't want to.
Re:A Critique of SQL, 40 Years Later
by cryptonector on Wednesday August 24, 2022 @04:02PM
(#32585003)
If it'd been 1971 and TFA still said "50 years later", would you have responded that "1971 is more than 50 years ago"?
>A Critique of SQL, 40 Years Later 08.11.2022
>The SQL language made its first appearance in 1974, as part of IBM’s System R database. It is now over 50 years later, and SQL is the de facto language for
1974 isn't 50 years ago yet :)