Re: [sqlite] sqlite3AtoF Handling of high numbers

Hello, On 2018-05-17 15:07, Stiefsohn, Roman wrote: Hello, i found out that SQLite is having problems with converting high numbers from string to double, located in the function "sqlite3AtoF": Yes -- it is having problems, however the problems are located in a compiler which lacks long

Re: [sqlite] Function to use to convert a text float to a float for use in ORDER BY

> select col1, col2 from mytable order by cast(body_size as float); And if you care about speed of select, you could create appropriate index: create index mytable_bodysize_index on mytable(cast(body_size as float)); 2018-05-18 0:13 GMT+02:00, Keith Medcalf : > > Why not

[sqlite] sqlite3AtoF Handling of high numbers

Hello, i found out that SQLite is having problems with converting high numbers from string to double, located in the function "sqlite3AtoF": Below is a table of input strings, and the returned double values, tested on Windows 7 64 bit with SQLite version 3.23.1: Input String:

Re: [sqlite] Function to use to convert a text float to a float for use in ORDER BY

Why not encode (speak / say) what you want to do directly, rather than prayerfully relying on implementation details -- select col1, col2 from mytable order by cast(body_size as float); --- The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a lot about anticipated

[sqlite] Function to use to convert a text float to a float for use in ORDER BY

My db has a table with a column defined thus: body_size text default '0.0' whose purpose is to hold the size of the item that the row represents. All rows contain a value but as a string to one decimal place, not a number. So the column contains strings such as '0.0', '3.7', '22.9', etc. All

Re: [sqlite] After update from 3.20 to 3.23 alter table throws error for boolean with default value FALSE

On 17 May 2018, at 8:17pm, Warren Young wrote: > On May 17, 2018, at 12:54 PM, Simon Slavin wrote: > >> [snip] doing it properly might be how SQLite 4 would start [snip] > > That sort reasoning gave us Python 3, which forked the Python community for

Re: [sqlite] After update from 3.20 to 3.23 alter table throws error for boolean with default value FALSE

On May 17, 2018, at 12:54 PM, Simon Slavin wrote: > > On 17 May 2018, at 7:13pm, Dominique Devienne wrote: > >> I think I'm not alone in wishing there was a way to disable all legacy >> backward compatibility "warts". > > However, doing it properly

Re: [sqlite] After update from 3.20 to 3.23 alter table throws error for boolean with default value FALSE

On 17 May 2018, at 7:13pm, Dominique Devienne wrote: > I think I'm not alone in wishing there was a way to disable all legacy > backward compatibility "warts". The testing involved is horrendous. You have to test everything with the setting enabled, then test it again

Re: [sqlite] After update from 3.20 to 3.23 alter table throws error for boolean with default value FALSE

> I think I'm not alone in wishing there was a way to disable all legacy backward compatibility "warts". +1 for that ;-) ___ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org

Re: [sqlite] After update from 3.20 to 3.23 alter table throws error for boolean with default value FALSE

On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 6:51 PM Richard Hipp wrote: > On 5/17/18, David Raymond wrote: > > So what confuses me is that I would think that what comes after "DEFAULT" > > would have to be a string literal if it's not an identifier. So why does > it > >

Re: [sqlite] After update from 3.20 to 3.23 alter table throws error for boolean with default value FALSE

Thanks. -Original Message- From: sqlite-users [mailto:sqlite-users-boun...@mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Richard Hipp Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2018 12:52 PM To: SQLite mailing list Subject: Re: [sqlite] After update from 3.20 to 3.23 alter table throws error for boolean with

Re: [sqlite] After update from 3.20 to 3.23 alter table throws error for boolean with default value FALSE

On 5/17/18, David Raymond wrote: > So what confuses me is that I would think that what comes after "DEFAULT" > would have to be a string literal if it's not an identifier. So why does it > let you put something in there without needing to put it in quotes? There was a

Re: [sqlite] Is this really the best way to do this?

There is no difference. The problem statement was: Look up the mail address (which is constrained unique) and return the defined action (which is constrained NOT NULL). If there is no "action" (which can be only because the mail does not exist) return OK. Unless, of course, the initial

Re: [sqlite] After update from 3.20 to 3.23 alter table throws error for boolean with default value FALSE

So what confuses me is that I would think that what comes after "DEFAULT" would have to be a string literal if it's not an identifier. So why does it let you put something in there without needing to put it in quotes? Is that an SQLite thing or an SQL thing I've never noticed? SQLite version

Re: [sqlite] After update from 3.20 to 3.23 alter table throws error for boolean with default value FALSE

On 5/17/18, heribert wrote: > Hello, > > after updating to release 3.23 the following sql-command do not work any > longer > > 'alter table Inbox add column WasSend boolean default FALSE' > The command works with 3.20 upto now. Actually not. What 3.20 was doing was

Re: [sqlite] After update from 3.20 to 3.23 alter table throws error for boolean with default value FALSE

On 17 May 2018, at 4:32pm, heribert wrote: > 'alter table Inbox add column WasSend boolean default FALSE' > [...] > > So i looked into the SQLite keyword list... but i didn't find neither FALSE > nor TRUE. So, why did the FALSE work with 3.20? It wasn't doing what you

[sqlite] After update from 3.20 to 3.23 alter table throws error for boolean with default value FALSE

Hello, after updating to release 3.23 the following sql-command do not work any longer 'alter table Inbox add column WasSend boolean default FALSE' The command works with 3.20 upto now. With 3.23 i got the error: 'Cannot add a column with non-constant default' After changing FALSE to 0 the

Re: [sqlite] Is this really the best way to do this?

Hello, On 2018-05-17 10:40, Dominique Devienne wrote: On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 8:33 PM Keith Medcalf wrote: SELECT coalsce((select action from blocked where mail='...'), 'OK') as action; Nice one Keith. Works (see below), but I

Re: [sqlite] www3.sqlite.org ssl certificate expired

On 5/17/18, Donald Griggs wrote: > At this writing, the www3.sqlite.org cert appears valid for me. A "Let's > Encrypt" cert valid from Apr 14 through July 13. > The cert recently renewed. That happened automatically. But I had to restart the webserver to get it to

Re: [sqlite] www3.sqlite.org ssl certificate expired

At this writing, the www3.sqlite.org cert appears valid for me. A "Let's Encrypt" cert valid from Apr 14 through July 13. www.sqlite.org and www2.sqlite.org show similar valid certs. > ___ sqlite-users mailing list

Re: [sqlite] Is this really the best way to do this?

On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 8:33 PM Keith Medcalf wrote: > > SELECT coalsce((select action > from blocked > where mail='...'), 'OK') as action; > Nice one Keith. Works (see below), but I find it a bit intuitive, since returning no row is

[sqlite] www3.sqlite.org ssl certificate expired

Hello Richard ! There is another problem with sqlite3 servers, this time it's the ssl certificate that has expired. Cheers ! ___ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org