Roger, I do not expect my request to be a priority. I have suggested only that such black-box amalgamations be kept in mind as a mitigating factor when the architects are assigning a priority to a feature request. In those cases where it is impossible for the end-user to avail himself of the load_extension capabilities of SQLite, the core may be the only place to implement a desired feature. The function I asked for (raw/naive codepoint-by-codepoint string reverse) does exist in other mainstream databases, including Oracle and SQLServer. I will consider it progress if we could get beyond the two stock replies: "you should do that in your application" and "you could do that in an extension".
Regards Tim Romano Swarthmore PA On Mon, Jul 26, 2010 at 6:37 PM, Roger Binns <rog...@rogerbinns.com> wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 07/26/2010 12:17 PM, Tim Romano wrote: > > But Roger, the "layer sitting in front of SQLite" is a programming > > environment which provides its own (black-box) connectivity to SQLite, > and > > it isn't going to be calling any DLL into which one will have injected a > UDF > > library in the manner you have laid out, and it's not going to let the > > developer load an extension either. That's what I've been trying to > make > > clear. > > You keep missing what I am saying :-) > > This is only an issue if the layer includes SQLite as an amalgamation > statically in which case it is a black box as you described.(*) > > If that layer uses SQLite as a DLL then you load the same SQLite DLL > first, tell it call the callback of your choice on connections being > opened, and then when the layer uses SQLite (which will be the same DLL) > and opens a connection, your callback is called. > > (*) If your problem is now that you have chosen to use some sort of > access layer, and that layer has chosen to hide SQLite internally, and > they haven't provided access to some SQLite functionality, and they > won't if you ask them to, then expecting this to be a priority to the > SQLite team is rather strange. > > Roger > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ > > iEYEARECAAYFAkxODhwACgkQmOOfHg372QStjwCfdBiKhnNrcpMHCqcWPJI3DzSu > ejUAoL2PmX3pJ8/1c/RH8zYXRfq1pZyA > =T6Bb > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > sqlite-users@sqlite.org > http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users > _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
