Since this thread from October focused on clojure.core/resultset-seq,
I thought I'd bump it again in the context of the (new)
clojure.java.jdbc library (formerly clojure.contrib.sql).
In order to support naming strategies, c.j.j uses an internal,
modified copy of resultset-seq that allows you to control the way SQL
entity names are converted to keywords. The default is still
clojure.string/lower-case but you can override the behavior for calls
to c.j.j. Naming strategies also allow you to control how keywords are
converted to SQL entity names within c.j.j.
I'm undecided on whether to expose this function (it's currently
clojure.java.jdbc.internal/resultset-seq*) as part of the public API
for c.j.j. In favor of exposing it: it would provide a way to get the
behavior most people in this thread seem to want. Against exposing it:
potential confusion with the version in clojure.core?
This is the only decision I want to tie up before declaring a 0.0.1
release of c.j.j (and moving on to other requested enhancements for
0.0.2).
If anyone has any input...?
Sean
On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 2:04 PM, Laurent PETIT <laurent.pe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> 2010/10/15 Mark Engelberg <mark.engelb...@gmail.com>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 15, 2010 at 1:49 AM, David Powell <djpow...@djpowell.net>
>> wrote:
>> > I'm in favour of down-casing - at least by default. Some processing is
>> > going to happen anyway, as column names might contain spaces, which
>> > wouldn't
>> > be allowed in keywords.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Dave
>>
>> One of the more significant nuisances in Clojure/Java interop is that
>> if you use some sort of wrapper library which converts Clojure things
>> to Java, and then converts from Java back to Clojure, you often end up
>> with something different than you started. Anywhere we can ameliorate
>> this, we should.
>>
>> For example, if I create a table using clojure.contrib.sql, where the
>> column names are things like :numberOfApples, and then I load in a
>> bunch of maps of the form {:numberOfApples 2}, {:numberOfApples 5},
>> and so on, then when I fetch them out of the database, I really need
>> them to be {:numberOfApples 2}, etc. so that I can compare them with
>> the original maps used to fill the database to begin with.
>>
>> Right now, I get back {:numberofapples 2}. Yes, SQL is usually case
>> insensitive, but Clojure is not, so everything breaks down if you
>> don't get back the maps in the form you started with. Since SQL
>> typically *stores* the column names internally in mixed case (even
>> though it ignores the case for querying purposes), you might as well
>> retrieve them in mixed case so it matches the form you started with.
>>
>> Why would I write my column names using mixed case? Because I once
>> tried using :number-of-apples to match Clojure's conventions, but got
>> burned by a number of third-party tools gagging on the hyphens.
>>
>
> I guess most of the time column names are written with
> names_separated_by_underscores, but anyway, it seems indeed weird that such
> downcase is done, especially without any (or to come) good reason for that.
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "Clojure" group.
To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your
first post.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
