I've amended the README.md to explain what I meant. My error was in using the word dynamic!

Just to be clear I'm using it for the same reason as trailing commas.

If I'm inspecting a dataset I use WHERE 1=1 so I can add and remove conditions more easily.

I realise the confusion is in my wording of dynamic - I might amend the README.md to clarify. Thanks for the feedback!

That's right - it's just a quicker way of being able to comment/uncomment conditions when doing EDA or debugging.

Not at all actually, I just hadn't really planned to add this as a tip. Additionally I thought an in-line view was fine for the examples included. But maybe I will!

That's a totally valid point haha.

I'll try to give some constructive criticism instead of a drive by pot shot. I'm sorry, it's just that the leading commas make my eyes bleed and I really hope the industry moves away from it.

On point 3: What I do is use CTEs to create intermediate columns (with good names) and then a final one creating the final column. It's way more readable.

```sql

with intermediate as (

select

  DATEDIFF(DAY, timeslot_date, CURRENT_DATE()) > 7 as days_7_difference,

  DATEDIFF(DAY, timeslot_date, CURRENT_DATE()) >= 29 as days_29_difference,

  LAG(overnight_fta_share, 1) OVER (PARTITION BY timeslot_date, timeslot_channel ORDER BY timeslot_activity) as overnight_fta_share_1_lag,

  LAG(overnight_fta_share, 2) OVER (PARTITION BY timeslot_date, timeslot_channel ORDER BY timeslot_activity)as overnight_fta_share_2_lag

from timeslot_data)

select

  iff(days_7_difference, overnight_fta_share_1_lag, null) as C7_fta_share,

  iff(days_29_difference, overnight_fta_share_2_lag, null) as C28_fta_share

from intermediate ```

I love leading commas and am leading the charge for change.

I apologize in advance and hope you are able to come to grips with how easy it is to read and understand at some point in the near future.

I appreciate the feedback, no offence taken. I'm an analyst so I often find the leading comma useful when I'm testing something and want to quickly comment a column out but I take your point.

And I agree, I should have used CTEs for this query, I was just trying to save lines of code which had the unintended consequence of quite an ugly query. However I did want to use it as an example of indentation being useful to make it slightly easier to read. Although perhaps I'm the only one who thinks so.

I greatly appreciate the constructive criticism.

> testing something and want to quickly comment a column out

This is a pretty solid reason for use in temporary queries so no doubt this approach will be around for a long time.

I didn't realise that, great to know. Thanks!

I'll add this as a caveat. I'm an analyst so my SQL isn't really exposed to anyone other than myself and so I wasn't aware of this, thanks for flagging.

A random person claims adding 1=1 is a security risk and you are going to add it as caveat without verifying if the claim is true nor knowing why? That's how misinformation spreads around.

OP doesn't know what they are talking about because adding 1=1 is not a security risk. 1=1 is related to sql injections where a malicious attacker injects 'OR 1=1' into the end of the where clause to disable the where clause completely. OP probably saw '1=1' and threw that into the comment.

Read my other comments. I worked with SQL on and off since the last century. It has nothing to do with your poor assumptions.

Duration of working with SQL doesn't matter. The better SQL programmers don't do it specifically, and have experience in real languages that they bring over to database queries.

Not sure I get this. But I think it does matter since you understand why people do it to begin with. I worked on two enterprise solutions over the last couple of years that have this exact problem. That people are using WHERE 1=1 and then add random "AND something=something" that completely trashes the performance of the db. Also, it does not matter as much on-prem. But in cloud envs it does. Since you can't really spike CPU and mem the same way as on-prem.

The reason I pointed out this specific issue is just that I thought it was the worsed of many poor tips. ChatGPT can give better tips.

If the query planner can't optimize out "IF TRUE" I don't know what to say. Is there something deeper happening or is this just gross incompetence?

Jesus. The problem is not WHERE 1=1. It is WHY people do it. People do it because they then in Python, JS or whatever can easily add conditions. Like QUERY + "AND x='blabla'". There is the problem. Every time you create a unique SQL statement the query will need a new query plan in most SQL engines. Some will cache parts of the query. And you could use parameters along with this paradigm but if you are this bad at SQL I doubt it.

It is kinda funny that op backpedal on this cause to me the whole site is amateurish. I just pointed out what I thought was the worst part. It is likely that it is generated by AI. Either way the post is terrible.

I'm an analyst so I literally only query for analytical purposes. I don't have any SQL code embedded in an application so the 1=1 is purely for tweaking/testing a query more quickly.

I certainly didn't use AI, all these tips/tricks are from work experience and reading Snowflake documentation and the like, but I guess I can't convince you either way. Regardless I appreciate the feedback!

Fair point!

1=1 is not a security risk