On 2008 Feb 29, at 23:13, Alex Shinn wrote:
However, different backends represent this (and various other extensions we'll eventually want) in different ways. SQL could just generate a standard syntax that all the backends would have to support, but then they'd be reparsing the SQL string we just generated and then putting it back together in their own way. It makes more sense to integrate the SQL generation with the backends from the start.
This all sounds uncomfortably like ODBC to me. I would not use a module like that, but would use a DBI-like module, for the reasons we discussed a couple of days ago: prototyping, relatively quick-and-dirty applications, and teaching. A caution against overengineering isn't out of place here. What is the problem this high-level API is trying to solve? -- vincent _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
