[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Bruno Desthuilliers wrote: > > SQLite never pretended to be a full-blown RDBMS - just a lightweight > > simple embedded database as SQL-compliant as possible. > > Ah, *you* haven't read the documentation either! > > "as SQL-compliant as possible"? > > ROTFLMAO!
No need to be rude really. In this context "as SQL-compliant as possible" means, "as SQL-compliant as it is possible to be within the project's restrictions", which presumably refer to code size and speed. It's a reasonable trade-off. > ********************************************************** > * The authors argue that static typing is a bug in the * > * SQL specification that SQLite has fixed in a backwards * > * compatible way. * > ********************************************************** > </quote> > > "Fixed"? Up until now, I didn't think it was possible for > crackpot theories to be implemented in computer science. > This is absolutely the craziest thing I've ever heard. It's not a crackpot theory. It's a completely reasonable theory. SQL is based on relational algebra, which provides a mathematical set of operators for grouping data that is stored in separate sets. That data is selected and projected according to its value, and nothing else. The concept of it having a 'type' has been overlaid on top of this, presumably to facilitate efficient implementation, which tends to require fixed-width rows (and hence columns). It's not necessary in any sense, and it's reasonable to argue that if it was trivial to implement variable width columns as efficiently as fixed width columns, that explicit data types might never have needed to exist. > So much for > "If switching to a larger database such as PostgreSQL or Oracle > is later necessary, the switch should be relatively easy." If you rely too much on a language-enforced data type rather than the values of the underlying data, perhaps Python is not for you! Personally I've migrated from SQLite to MySQL a couple of times (on small projects, granted) and not found it to be a problem at all. > Fixing the documentation is now becoming an enormous task. I don't think so... it doesn't take much to say that the module implements a subset of SQL but stores ignores data types. > What are the chances that anything I send in as a bug report > will simply be ignored? Kind of like the Emporer's New Clothes, eh? > It would be an admission of ignorance and stupidity on the part > of the Python Development Team, wouldn't it? Why get so bitter over this? I agree the docs need fixing but you make it sound like this was a deliberate attempt to make you waste your time. -- Ben Sizer -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
