The original question was that I was curious about the history.
Noting where we are now at, I will give as examples of two real world
applications:
1. 32 bit embedded sqlite. Realtime storing data from various hardware
interfaces.
The data includes unsigned 32 bit integers which are stored as
Roger Schlueter wrote:
>
> What about System.Data.SQLite?
>
I would estimate that the next System.Data.SQLite release, which will
include SQLite 3.25, will be released within two to three weeks after
SQLite 3.25 itself is released, barring an unforeseen complications.
--
Joe Mistachkin
What about System.Data.SQLite?
On 8/25/2018 13:04, Richard Hipp wrote:
On 8/25/18, R Smith wrote:
A quick dev question: Any idea on the eta for the next release?
My best guess at the moment is 4 or 5 weeks.
___
sqlite-users mailing list
On 8/25/18, R Smith wrote:
> A quick dev question: Any idea on the eta for the next release?
My best guess at the moment is 4 or 5 weeks.
--
D. Richard Hipp
d...@sqlite.org
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
A quick dev question: Any idea on the eta for the next release?
Reason for asking: We're planning a DB tool release soon and can
release omitting the Windowing functions, or if it's going to arrive
soon, simply wait a bit and include it.
This answer, even if vague, will help us make that
Thanks. The fix is checked in and will appear in the next release.
On 8/25/18, Wolfgang Enzinger wrote:
>
> In https://sqlite.org/lang_expr.html, the anchor
>
>
>
> appears twice. Obviously the second occurence should be
>
>
>
> Wolfgang
>
> ___
>
On 8/25/18, Ralf Junker wrote:
> I am aware that the use of SQLITE_UNTESTABLE is discouraged. Still I
> want to point developers to the fact that SQLITE_UNTESTABLE breaks RBU.
Thank you, Ralf. We are well aware of this.
There are lots of similar situations, where omitting features from
SQLite
In https://sqlite.org/lang_expr.html, the anchor
appears twice. Obviously the second occurence should be
Wolfgang
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
I am aware that the use of SQLITE_UNTESTABLE is discouraged. Still I
want to point developers to the fact that SQLITE_UNTESTABLE breaks RBU.
In particular, RBU relies on SQLITE_TESTCTRL_IMPOSTER to be fully
working. With SQLITE_UNTESTABLE defined, this is not the case. RBU
functions return
On 2018-08-24 11:58 PM, Thomas Kurz wrote:
What is the value of a built-in UNSIGNED type when we already have INTEGER? I
can't think of any. -- Darren Duncan
Signed integers only allow half the range of values of unsigned ones. You
cannot store a pointer value in them. (You can by casting to
> What is the value of a built-in UNSIGNED type when we already have INTEGER?
> I
can't think of any. -- Darren Duncan
Signed integers only allow half the range of values of unsigned ones. You
cannot store a pointer value in them. (You can by casting to signed, but then
sorting is done
11 matches
Mail list logo
