Hi!
On Oct 10, 2008, at 4:20 PM, Roland Bouman wrote:
I think this is a very interesting thought and I would love to see
this feature. Personally I have never looked in detail into the
standard with regard to user defined types so I cannot comment on how
retarded that is.
It is pretty bad. UDT's are useless in my opinion. What folks want I
find is a way to take unstructured data types (aka blobs) and turn
them into semi structured types while they reside in the database.
What do you think? Is this something you feel should be part of the
type definition? If not, how will values of custom types interact with
expressions that use them?
Doing loadable types is actually pretty straightforward in our design.
The class to create them is simple to understand and handles these
issues.
There are two big problems though:
1) A way to handle a missing "type". AKA how to say "it means this"
and then what to do if the class that defines it is not available
(maybe resort to being a blob?).
2) There is in the top of field.cc an array which defines conversions.
To make this work, it would need to go.
Solve those two problems and adding loadable types is an afternoon
project. No matter what I would like to see number 2 solved. The array
is one big hack.
Cheers,
-Brian
--
_______________________________________________________
Brian "Krow" Aker, brian at tangent.org
Seattle, Washington
http://krow.net/ <-- Me
http://tangent.org/ <-- Software
_______________________________________________________
You can't grep a dead tree.
_______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
Post to : [email protected]
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~drizzle-discuss
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
