2009/8/5 Peter Bex <[email protected]>: > [...] > You haven't seen zbigniew's sql-de-lite egg yet? It's another sqlite egg > with (IMHO) a more Schemely API. > [...]
Hello, of course I have seen it, but several people requested my SQLite3 binding to be ported to CHICKEN 4 anyway. The APIs of the two bindings don't differ too much in my opinion, but it can't hurt to have a choice. Could you elaborate which parts of the sql-de-lite API seem more schemely to you? Personally I dislike several design choices in sql-de-lite: A client side statement cache may be convenient in some situations but it always adds a little overhead and doesn't really belong into a direct database API binding, but rather into an ORM or other higher level layer that hides the database details. Allowing the database to be closed if statements are still active is necessary when a statement cache is used, but I think it opens a source of hard to find bugs if included in a low level database access layer like sql-de-lite -- the application programmer is still responsible that every statement has finished executing before the database is closed, but will no longer be notified when she fails to do so. And last but not least I like to use user defined SQL functions from time to time, which is not possible with sql-de-lite. cu, Thomas -- When C++ is your hammer, every problem looks like your thumb. _______________________________________________ Chicken-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
