Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On 2014/02/21 11:54, _ph_ wrote: Suggestion: Warning banner, and a .saveas command that copies the db to a file. (I haven't read the entire thread, sorry if this already came up.) There is usually no call to read an entire thread, unless you decide to actually post an opinion, in which case

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

Suggestion: Warning banner, and a .saveas command that copies the db to a file. (I haven't read the entire thread, sorry if this already came up.) -- View this message in context:

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:49:50 -0500 Stephen Chrzanowski wrote: > I don't like the idea of letting the software decide what should be > done based on a configuration file. Hmm, isn't it the other way around? Does the user tell the software what to do via a configuration

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On 11 Feb 2014 at 21:49, Stephen Chrzanowski wrote: > I don't like the idea of letting the software decide what should be done > based on a configuration file. The .sqliterc file already exists, so you're too late. > Linux and Windows both can isolate processes from each

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

Lets not throw honey at the problem when a bear is around. Some of the things I've seen in this thread just makes it sound like the kitchen sink should be included in this application. I don't like the idea of letting the software decide what should be done based on a configuration file. Linux

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:30 PM, Simon Slavin wrote: > On 11 Feb 2014, at 4:06am, James K. Lowden wrote: > >> ${HOME}/.sqlite/db would be my choice. > > Since the objective is not to let a naive user unexpectedly lose the data, it > might seem a

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:06 AM, James K. Lowden wrote: > > (1) Detect double-click launch by looking at argc and argv. > > Why make this a special case? If no database name is provided, > the behavior should be the same regardless of how launched or what OS. > Easier

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

) >-Original Message- >From: sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org [mailto:sqlite-users- >boun...@sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Nico Williams >Sent: Monday, 10 February, 2014 21:36 >To: General Discussion of SQLite Database >Subject: Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe co

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:06 PM, James K. Lowden wrote: James proposes that when no DB is named on the command-line argument list then a [user-specific] default be used, and that the user be told. I like it. I admit that I often rely on the shell keeping no state

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On 11 Feb 2014, at 4:06am, James K. Lowden wrote: > ${HOME}/.sqlite/db would be my choice. Since the objective is not to let a naive user unexpectedly lose the data, it might seem a bad idea to put the file in a directory which is hidden from naive users. Just

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On Mon, 10 Feb 2014 10:23:57 -0500 Richard Hipp wrote: > Proposed Change To Address The Problem: Thank you for addressing this. I for one think you're getting a lot of unhelpful advice. A database application that loses data? As a feature? > (1) Detect double-click launch

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Petite Abeille wrote: > > On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:39 PM, Gabor Grothendieck > wrote: > >> That should have read right join. > > My personal opinion? Anyone even considering using a right outer join should > be

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On Feb 10, 2014, at 7:39 PM, Gabor Grothendieck wrote: > That should have read right join. My personal opinion? Anyone even considering using a right outer join should be cursed into repeating their first day at high school. For ever. Groundhog Day, The High School

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On 2014/02/10 20:31, Petite Abeille wrote: On Feb 10, 2014, at 4:23 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: Proposed Change To Address The Problem: What’s the problem exactly? CS101 students distress? That’s way beyond SQLite reach. My 2¢: don’t create a default persistent database. This

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

That should have read right join. Its a nuisance when you are trying to show someone SQL and trying to keep things simple that you have to add the complexity of switching the arguments around. I am still on 3.7.17 which is the version that currently ships with the software I am using but its

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

base > Subject: Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line > shell > > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Mike King <making1...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Why not show the warning on exit only if an in memory database is in use. > > > > > &

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On 2014/02/10 18:22, John McKown wrote: Being a UNIX (Linux) partisan, and somewhat tacky towards Windows users, why not go the normal Windows route of having a "pop up" dialog box (or at least a message) similar to what normal Windows applications say about possible loss of data. Something

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

Good day, I'd rather the warning be in the text when you open the sqlite tool with an implied in memory database. Put an extra \n if you want the warning to stand out. Adam On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Petite Abeille wrote: > > On Feb 10, 2014, at 5:19 PM,

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On Feb 10, 2014, at 4:23 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > Proposed Change To Address The Problem: What’s the problem exactly? CS101 students distress? That’s way beyond SQLite reach. My 2¢: don’t create a default persistent database. This is not helpful to anyone.

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On Feb 10, 2014, at 5:19 PM, Gabor Grothendieck wrote: > The other features that would make teaching a bit easier would be to support > left join explicitly and support the rfc4180 standard for csv files. Hmmm? Left join:

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 1:11 PM, Mike King wrote: > Why not show the warning on exit only if an in memory database is in use. > > Because on windows, the likely "exit" will be when the user clicks the big red X in the upper right-hand corner, closing the terminal window

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

Why not show the warning on exit only if an in memory database is in use. Likewise by default open in memory unless a path is specified. On Monday, 10 February 2014, Richard Hipp wrote: > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 12:51 PM, > wrote: > > > I second the

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On Feb 10, 2014, at 10:20 AM, Jay Kreibich wrote: > On Feb 10, 2014, at 10:15 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > >> What if, instead of opening a standard database, the sqlite3.exe >> command-line shell just issued a warning message reminding the user that >> they are

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

I was just going to suggest that John. Short of hitting CTRL-C to break out of the program, the user may have to "double-quit" if no file path has been given to be saved to, just for confirmation. > .q !!Warning - In-Memory Database not saved. Quit again to exit without saving > .q

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

Being a UNIX (Linux) partisan, and somewhat tacky towards Windows users, why not go the normal Windows route of having a "pop up" dialog box (or at least a message) similar to what normal Windows applications say about possible loss of data. Something along the lines of "You are exiting sqlite3,

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On Feb 10, 2014, at 10:15 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > What if, instead of opening a standard database, the sqlite3.exe > command-line shell just issued a warning message reminding the user that > they are working on a transient in-memory database and suggesting the use > of the

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

com> wrote: Subject: Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell To: "General Discussion of SQLite Database" <sqlite-users@sqlite.org> Date: Monday, February 10, 2014, 10:46 AM On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Simon Slavin <slav...@bigfr

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 5:15 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > What if, instead of opening a standard database, the sqlite3.exe > command-line shell just issued a warning message reminding the user that > they are working on a transient in-memory database and suggesting the use > of the

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

What if, instead of opening a standard database, the sqlite3.exe command-line shell just issued a warning message reminding the user that they are working on a transient in-memory database and suggesting the use of the ".open" command to connect to a persistent on-disk database. Like in this

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:23 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > The Problem: > > Many new users (especially university students taking a "database 101" The other features that would make teaching a bit easier would be to support left join explicitly and support the rfc4180 standard for

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On 10 Feb 2014, at 4:15pm, Richard Hipp wrote: > What if, instead of opening a standard database, the sqlite3.exe > command-line shell just issued a warning message reminding the user that > they are working on a transient in-memory database and suggesting the use > of the

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 4:23 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > Proposed Change To Address The Problem: > > When launching sqlite3.exe with a double-click, have it open a standard > database in a standard place instead of an in-memory database as you would > get when launching

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Simon Slavin wrote: > Why ? I suspect some Mac user would find it just as useful. And then why > leave Unix users out ? > Speaking as a member of the Unix-only crowd: please don't! While i admit that the current behaviour has caused minor

Re: [sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

On 10 Feb 2014, at 3:23pm, Richard Hipp wrote: > When launching sqlite3.exe with a double-click, have it open a standard > database in a standard place instead of an in-memory database as you would > get when launching sqlite3.exe with no arguments. Possibly also give >

[sqlite] Proposed enhancement to the sqlite3.exe command-line shell

The Problem: Many new users (especially university students taking a "database 101" class) download the "sqlite3.exe" file from the SQLite website, double-click on the "sqlite3" icon to get a command-line shell, then start typing SQL statements. But when they exit the shell, they are distressed