> then I don't think that you actually have a working knowledge of SQL in any sense.
Of course I have working knowledge of SQL, that's how I used MySQL back when we had to write things by hand. I just don't have a working knowledge of JOINs. I could look up the syntax if I needed to use it. [Looks it up] Looks easy enough.
There are numerous SQL commands most users of SQL would probably need to look up.
Arbitrarily deciding that having not-used X means you don't have a working knowledge is a fallacy. Someone else could arbitrarily decide the litmus test is stored procedures. MySQL didn't have those, so instead of using them we had to code at the application layer, and just happened to use application logic in places of JOINs as well.
I don't even remember if MySQL had joins, or non-buggy joins, a dozen years ago. Other people would say, "it doesn't have transactions, so it's not a real database", et cetera, et cetera. You work around limitations and get used to doing things a certain way.
It had JOINs but a lousy, lousy optimizer, also sub-SELECTs were (are?) a problem. I can't say that having a sort-of knowledge of some (very little)of MySQL is equivalent to having a working knowledge of SQL. Most commands that SQL users would probably need to look up would be the DDL commands, not simple (yes, it really is simple) stuff like LEFT OUTER and INNER JOINs. Also while saying MySQL didn't have SPs is an (fair) indictment of MySQL, you using application logic instead of JOINs is an indictment of you and your supposed 'working SQL knowledge'
I have enough SQL knowledge to replicate most websites I see. I am also familiar with it enough to look up things I don't know and use them. If that's not "working knowledge", you're using some different definition.
You can have working knowledge of e.g. calculus but need to look things up because you haven't memorized everything yet, and can learn some new method quickly. Someone without working knowledge would simply be lost, no matter what cheat sheets you put in front of them.
Of course I have working knowledge of SQL, that's how I used MySQL back when we had to write things by hand. I just don't have a working knowledge of JOINs. I could look up the syntax if I needed to use it. [Looks it up] Looks easy enough.
There are numerous SQL commands most users of SQL would probably need to look up.
Arbitrarily deciding that having not-used X means you don't have a working knowledge is a fallacy. Someone else could arbitrarily decide the litmus test is stored procedures. MySQL didn't have those, so instead of using them we had to code at the application layer, and just happened to use application logic in places of JOINs as well.
I don't even remember if MySQL had joins, or non-buggy joins, a dozen years ago. Other people would say, "it doesn't have transactions, so it's not a real database", et cetera, et cetera. You work around limitations and get used to doing things a certain way.