[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2016-02-07 Thread da...@andl.org
-users-bounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Jean-Christophe Deschamps Sent: Tuesday, 9 June 2015 5:16 PM To: General Discussion of SQLite Database Subject: Re: [sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl At 08:27 09/06/2015, you wrote: >Andl is at a slightly higher level than

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-15 Thread da...@andl.org
sage- From: sqlite-users-boun...@mailinglists.sqlite.org [mailto:sqlite-users-bounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Petite Abeille Sent: Monday, 15 June 2015 1:56 AM To: General Discussion of SQLite Database Subject: Re: [sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl > On Jun 14, 2015, at

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-15 Thread da...@andl.org
te-users-bounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Jean-Christophe Deschamps Sent: Tuesday, 9 June 2015 10:54 PM To: General Discussion of SQLite Database Subject: Re: [sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl At 13:50 09/06/2015, you wrote: >BTW I don't remember the last

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-14 Thread Petite Abeille
> On Jun 14, 2015, at 4:01 PM, david at andl.org wrote: > > First, I added a RECURSE() function to Andl, similar to the CTE in SQLite. Nice. > The Mandelbrot algorithm looks like this. Could we see something more, hmmm, pedestrian? Perhaps a simple recursive query, showing, say, all the

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-11 Thread da...@andl.org
Message- From: sqlite-users-boun...@mailinglists.sqlite.org [mailto:sqlite-users-bounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Richard Hipp Sent: Thursday, 11 June 2015 2:01 AM To: General Discussion of SQLite Database Subject: Re: [sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl On 6/9/15, david

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-11 Thread da...@andl.org
ounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Richard Hipp Sent: Friday, 5 June 2015 7:27 AM To: General Discussion of SQLite Database Subject: Re: [sqlite] User-defined types On 6/4/15, Darko Volaric < <mailto:lists at darko.org> lists at darko.org> wrote: > My point about JSON, etc is th

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-11 Thread da...@andl.org
Language - andl.org -Original Message- From: sqlite-users-boun...@mailinglists.sqlite.org [mailto:sqlite-users-bounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Dominique Devienne Sent: Tuesday, 9 June 2015 9:57 PM To: General Discussion of SQLite Database Subject: Re: [sqlite] User-defined

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-11 Thread da...@andl.org
-bounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of david at andl.org Sent: Tuesday, 9 June 2015 9:51 PM To: 'General Discussion of SQLite Database' Subject: Re: [sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl Thank you. Exactly so. One of the problems with this kind of project is finding 'good enough

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-10 Thread Petite Abeille
> On Jun 9, 2015, at 2:53 PM, Jean-Christophe Deschamps > wrote: > > Most probably! I can imagine that you don't encounter such style in common > business-like environments. Just for ?corporate' fun: analytic recursive common table expression - oh, my? with Clock( start_at, end_at,

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-10 Thread Richard Hipp
On 6/9/15, david at andl.org wrote: > I don't remember the last time I saw SQL like this. Understanding it > might be the challenge... I'll be giving a talk on CTEs this Saturday at the Southeastern Linuxfest (http://www.southeastlinuxfest.org/) during which I will explain and demonstrate how to

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-09 Thread da...@andl.org
] User-defined types -- in Andl At 08:27 09/06/2015, you wrote: >Andl is at a slightly higher level than SQL for writing simple queries. >Where it shines is writing complex queries that involve user-defined >types, custom transformations and custom aggregations. For complex &g

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-09 Thread da...@andl.org
Language - andl.org -Original Message- From: sqlite-users-boun...@mailinglists.sqlite.org [mailto:sqlite-users-bounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Nelson, Erik - 2 Sent: Monday, 8 June 2015 11:51 PM To: General Discussion of SQLite Database Subject: Re: [sqlite] User-defined types

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-09 Thread da...@andl.org
-users-bounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Eduardo Morras Sent: Tuesday, 9 June 2015 4:02 AM To: sqlite-users at mailinglists.sqlite.org Subject: Re: [sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl On Mon, 8 Jun 2015 15:28:11 +1000 wrote: > Thanks for pointing it out, but I knew that the best

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-09 Thread Jean-Christophe Deschamps
At 13:50 09/06/2015, you wrote: >BTW I don't remember the last time I saw SQL like this. Understanding it >might be the challenge `--- Most probably! I can imagine that you don't encounter such style in common business-like environments. Take your time, this SQL piece is clearly beyond

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-09 Thread Dominique Devienne
On Tue, Jun 9, 2015 at 1:50 PM, wrote: > Thank you. Exactly so. One of the problems with this kind of project is > finding 'good enough' challenges to tackle. > See also from the CTE doc: - https://www.sqlite.org/lang_with.html#sudoku - https://www.sqlite.org/lang_with.html#mandelbrot Thanks,

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-09 Thread Jean-Christophe Deschamps
At 08:27 09/06/2015, you wrote: >Andl is at a slightly higher level than SQL for writing simple queries. >Where it shines is writing complex queries that involve user-defined >types, >custom transformations and custom aggregations. For complex relational >operations there is nothing I know

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-09 Thread da...@andl.org
I hope you do try it. I'm looking for feedback. Sorry about the C#. Problem is, I'm way more productive in C# than any other language. C/C++ is just too slow to get things done and Java is still lagging. It would have taken far longer to do the SQLite C interface without .NET interop (JNI is

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-08 Thread Eduardo Morras
On Mon, 8 Jun 2015 15:28:11 +1000 wrote: > Thanks for pointing it out, but I knew that the best way to show off a > language is with examples. That's why there are nine sample Andl > scripts comprising dozens of individual examples in the Samples > folder. My guess is if that you're asking me to

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-08 Thread da...@andl.org
Message- From: sqlite-users-boun...@mailinglists.sqlite.org [mailto:sqlite-users-bounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Simon Slavin Sent: Monday, 8 June 2015 12:26 PM To: General Discussion of SQLite Database Subject: Re: [sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl On 8 Jun 2015, at 3:14am

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-08 Thread da...@andl.org
ounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Richard Hipp Sent: Friday, 5 June 2015 7:27 AM To: General Discussion of SQLite Database Subject: Re: [sqlite] User-defined types On 6/4/15, Darko Volaric < <mailto:lists at darko.org> lists at darko.org> wrote: > My point about JSON, etc is th

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-08 Thread da...@andl.org
ounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Richard Hipp Sent: Friday, 5 June 2015 7:27 AM To: General Discussion of SQLite Database Subject: Re: [sqlite] User-defined types On 6/4/15, Darko Volaric < <mailto:lists at darko.org> lists at darko.org> wrote: > My point about JSON, etc is th

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-08 Thread da...@andl.org
[mailto:sqlite-users-bounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Simon Slavin Sent: Monday, 8 June 2015 12:23 PM To: General Discussion of SQLite Database Subject: Re: [sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl On 8 Jun 2015, at 3:12am, wrote: > Is there a PDF? No, but that's a good idea. Did you ch

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-08 Thread Nelson, Erik - 2
david at andl.org wrote on Monday, June 08, 2015 9:23 AM > > Ultimately, I don't think it will really matter, because the role of > Andl is to be platform independent. Do you care what your SQL product > is written in? > Absolutely. I wouldn't be using SQLite if it wasn't C/C++, and I suspect

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-08 Thread Simon Slavin
On 8 Jun 2015, at 6:28am, wrote: > Thanks for pointing it out, but I knew that the best way to show off a > language is with examples. That's why there are nine sample Andl scripts > comprising dozens of individual examples in the Samples folder. My guess is > if that you're asking me to write

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-08 Thread da...@andl.org
[mailto:sqlite-users-bounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Simon Slavin Sent: Monday, 8 June 2015 4:00 AM To: General Discussion of SQLite Database Subject: Re: [sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl On 7 Jun 2015, at 6:51pm, Scott Doctor wrote: > Do you have a PDF that explains the langu

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-08 Thread da...@andl.org
...@mailinglists.sqlite.org [mailto:sqlite-users-bounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Scott Doctor Sent: Monday, 8 June 2015 3:52 AM To: General Discussion of SQLite Database Subject: Re: [sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl Do you have a PDF that explains the language? My opinion

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-08 Thread John McKown
On Sun, Jun 7, 2015 at 4:17 AM, wrote: > I've been reading this thread with great interest. It parallels the project > I've been working on: Andl. > > Andl is A New Database Language. > > Andl does what SQL does, but it is not SQL. Andl has been developed as a > fully featured database

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-08 Thread Scott Doctor
Any properly written documentation on any subject always begins with an executive summary (no more than a few pages), an overview (usually a dozen more pages), then gets into the nitty gritty. Consider if I want you to write a paragraph in Egyptian Hieroglyphics. So I provide you with a few

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-08 Thread Simon Slavin
On 8 Jun 2015, at 3:14am, wrote: > I suggest you just read the samples off GitHub. They cover the entire > language. Download the binary, run them and you see what they do. Sorry but no. You have it reversed. Your code isn't going to touch my computer unless you have already convinced me

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-08 Thread Simon Slavin
On 8 Jun 2015, at 3:12am, wrote: > Is there a PDF? No, but that's a good idea. Did you check out the samples? > They cover the entire language, and I could turn those into a PDF much > faster than a real language. It would take about a month to write a decent > tutorial and reference, but that

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-08 Thread Matthias-Christian Ott
On 2015-06-04 03:04, Darko Volaric wrote: > Regarding PgSQL, an advantage of encoding your own binary types is that you > can copy them straight into your code and execute with them directly - I > use the same encoding/data structures throughout and they serve my code and > requirements instead of

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-07 Thread da...@andl.org
Volaric Sent: Thursday, 4 June 2015 8:55 AM To: General Discussion of SQLite Database; ott at mirix.org Subject: Re: [sqlite] User-defined types I've tackled this problem from a couple of different angles. My goal was to allow arbitrary user defined types, based on the builtin types (essentially

[sqlite] User-defined types -- with Andl

2015-06-07 Thread da...@andl.org
Language - andl.org -Original Message- From: sqlite-users-boun...@mailinglists.sqlite.org [mailto:sqlite-users-bounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Richard Hipp Sent: Friday, 5 June 2015 9:11 AM To: General Discussion of SQLite Database Subject: Re: [sqlite] User-defined types On 6

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-07 Thread Simon Slavin
On 7 Jun 2015, at 6:51pm, Scott Doctor wrote: > Do you have a PDF that explains the language? There are plenty of blog entries which explain the language. I spent more time looking for some examples (I understand better from examples) and eventually found one. Simon.

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-07 Thread Scott Doctor
So we are supposed to learn this new language by osmosis? Scott Doctor scott at scottdoctor.com On 6/7/2015 11:00 AM, Simon Slavin wrote: > On 7 Jun 2015, at 6:51pm, Scott Doctor wrote: > >> Do you have a PDF that explains the language? > There are plenty of blog entries which

[sqlite] User-defined types -- in Andl

2015-06-07 Thread Scott Doctor
Regards > David M Bennett FACS > > Andl - A New Database Language - andl.org > > -Original Message- > From: sqlite-users-bounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org > [mailto:sqlite-users-bounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Darko > Volaric > Sent: Thursday, 4 June

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-05 Thread James K. Lowden
On Thu, 4 Jun 2015 15:11:55 -0700 Darko Volaric wrote: > Are you seriously saying that that SQL syntax is friendly? How can you > defend SQL syntax other than on grounds of history or > standardization? The first and best defense of SQL is that it has at least some basis in the relational

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-05 Thread James K. Lowden
On Fri, 5 Jun 2015 13:07:59 -0400 Stephen Chrzanowski wrote: > If N-Tier software development is 'annoying' and you are not happy, > either get help by other members of your team, or, find a different > hobby, because anything less than 3-tier programming dealing with > multiple languages,

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-05 Thread Simon Slavin
On 5 Jun 2015, at 3:05pm, Don V Nielsen wrote: > I do all kinds of --stuff-- > using Ruby and PHP. And the --stuff-- gets translated to SQL and sent to > my favorite db, Sqlite. I find it very annoying that in order to do good Web-facing systems I have to know all the following: HTML (and

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-05 Thread Darko Volaric
Yes, the relational model is the key, that is my point. The SQL language is an entirely arbitrary syntax applied to it. You don't need it to work a relational database, just like you don't have to program in C to write a program for a typical processor. I don't care about how many applications

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-05 Thread Scott Robison
On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 11:07 AM, Stephen Chrzanowski wrote: > First, who said that you had to keep all 6 sets of languages in your head > at once? I've never been told that, and I've been doing software > development since I was 8, taken several training courses in elementary, > high school,

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-05 Thread Stephen Chrzanowski
First, who said that you had to keep all 6 sets of languages in your head at once? I've never been told that, and I've been doing software development since I was 8, taken several training courses in elementary, high school, college, and while employed by three different companies (At different

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-05 Thread Don V Nielsen
> How can you defend SQL syntax other than on grounds of history or standardization? Short answer: QWERTY. Long answer: IBM mainframe DOS -> Z/OS. A 1960's o/s that is still supported by the inner workings of its most modern o/s. There's is nothing wrong with supporting the past. Sometimes

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-05 Thread Etienne Charland
What you're looking for seems similar to LINQ to SQLite (System.Data.SQLite). When programming in C#, I don't code any SQL. I use a strongly-typed interface that then generates SQL queries in the background. Besides LINQ, you could create another interface that suits your needs, and that can

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-05 Thread Darko Volaric
There's a bit of confusion as to what I'm actually proposing. I can't reply to everyone so I'll just post the APIs and/or patches when they're done and we can argue those on their merits. On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Darko Volaric wrote: > Well, I've been using SQL for about 30 years so I'm

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-05 Thread R.Smith
On 2015-06-05 12:11 AM, Darko Volaric wrote: > Are you seriously saying that that SQL syntax is friendly? How can you > defend SQL syntax other than on grounds of history or standardization? If > you're more comfortable and familiar with JSON the yes it is easier and you > can avoid an

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-05 Thread Simon Slavin
On 5 Jun 2015, at 12:11am, Richard Hipp wrote: > I just want to ensure that if, after working on your new approach for > a while, you eventually decide that SQL isn't quite as bad a language > as you originally thought it was, that you don't come back and say I > didn't warn you. I'm on my

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-05 Thread R.Smith
On 2015-06-04 11:16 PM, Darko Volaric wrote: > My point about JSON, etc is that there is no reason not to use that as a > query language if that makes it easier. If your system is efficient with > JSON, why not accept a query that is formatted as JSON? It's not > semantically different to SQL

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-05 Thread Simon Slavin
On 4 Jun 2015, at 11:11pm, Darko Volaric wrote: > Are you seriously saying that that SQL syntax is friendly? How can you > defend SQL syntax other than on grounds of history or standardization? If > you're more comfortable and familiar with JSON the yes it is easier and you > can avoid an

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Simon Slavin
On 4 Jun 2015, at 10:16pm, Darko Volaric wrote: > Here's an example (with a roughly > JSON notation): > > { > operation: "insert" > table: "blah" > columns: ["a", "b", "c"] > values: [1.3, 2.0, 3.1] > on-conflict: "replace" > } > > That is equivalent to an INSERT SQL statement, but why

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Richard Hipp
On 6/4/15, Darko Volaric wrote: > > What is motivating this for me is that I generate many unique queries in my > code for almost any operation. Converting those to SQL is error prone and > uses a lot of memory compared to the operation involved. The database > engine is so fast and efficient yet

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Keith Medcalf
On 2015-06-05 12:11 AM, Darko Volaric wrote: >I now regret using JSON as an example since everyone wants me to >convert SQL to JSON for them now, but my point isn't any particular >notation, I want an API of sorts instead of a notation or syntax. Then >you can adapt anything you like and make

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Christopher Vance
If you really want your own types, you could always bundle with ASN.1 and store the result as a blob. On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Dominique Devienne wrote: > On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 3:04 AM, Darko Volaric wrote: > > > In my case I'm already modifying and maintaining my own version of >

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Nico Williams
On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 03:36:34PM -0700, Darko Volaric wrote: > I now regret using JSON as an example since everyone wants me to convert > [...] So you don't like the SQL language, but if you're after UDTs and your first stop is to design a different language (or merely make it easier for you to

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Scott Robison
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 4:21 PM, Darko Volaric wrote: > I'm saying that SQL is alien to the platform it's being used on and native > is better. I'm trying to make a general point (in vain it seems), I don't > use JSON. > {bunch of stuff snipped} I understand where you're coming from, I think. I

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Richard Hipp
On 6/4/15, Darko Volaric wrote: > My point about JSON, etc is that there is no reason not to use that as a > query language if that makes it easier. If your system is efficient with > JSON, why not accept a query that is formatted as JSON? It's not > semantically different to SQL syntax. Here's

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Darko Volaric
Well, I've been using SQL for about 30 years so I'm unlikely to change my view, but I think you bring up a much more important point: instead of arguing online I should get back to work! On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Richard Hipp wrote: > On 6/4/15, Darko Volaric wrote: > > > > What is

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Scott Doctor
Just write your program in C. Use the C syntax to do whatever you want and you have full control over the minutiae. Scott Doctor scott at scottdoctor.com -- > On 6/4/15, Darko Volaric wrote: >> What is motivating this for me is that I generate many unique

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Nico Williams
On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 02:16:22PM -0700, Darko Volaric wrote: > { > operation: "insert" > table: "blah" > columns: ["a", "b", "c"] > values: [1.3, 2.0, 3.1] > on-conflict: "replace" > } I do this all the time. It's trivial enough to generate SQL from that sort of thing. If you have

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Darko Volaric
I now regret using JSON as an example since everyone wants me to convert SQL to JSON for them now, but my point isn't any particular notation, I want an API of sorts instead of a notation or syntax. Then you can adapt anything you like and make it efficient with the platform you're using. So for

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Darko Volaric
I'm saying that SQL is alien to the platform it's being used on and native is better. I'm trying to make a general point (in vain it seems), I don't use JSON. On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Simon Slavin wrote: > > On 4 Jun 2015, at 10:16pm, Darko Volaric wrote: > > > Here's an example (with a

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Darko Volaric
Yes, you can do that but I'm trying to remove steps and conversions, not add more. My point is that a more native interface is better than SQL. Yes it's basic, but as I said, a first step. I'm making changes to one part, making changes to another part makes no difference. The fork has been

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Darko Volaric
Are you seriously saying that that SQL syntax is friendly? How can you defend SQL syntax other than on grounds of history or standardization? If you're more comfortable and familiar with JSON the yes it is easier and you can avoid an unnecessary conversion step. If you're using JavaScript you'd

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Darko Volaric
My point about JSON, etc is that there is no reason not to use that as a query language if that makes it easier. If your system is efficient with JSON, why not accept a query that is formatted as JSON? It's not semantically different to SQL syntax. Here's an example (with a roughly JSON notation):

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Nico Williams
On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 11:45:28AM -0700, Darko Volaric wrote: > Which sort of leads me to my next feature, which is bypassing the SQL > language. [...] I like SQL, but sure, if the compiler worked by first parsing into an AST, and if the AST were enough of an interface (versioned, though not

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Nico Williams
On Thu, Jun 04, 2015 at 10:54:16AM +0200, Dominique Devienne wrote: > On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Christopher Vance > wrote: > > If you really want your own types, you could always bundle with ASN.1 and > > store the result as a blob. FYI, Heimdal has a very nice, small, simple, featureful,

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Nico Williams
On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 06:04:29PM -0700, Darko Volaric wrote: > Yep, references a another one. Just like the functions, you have to join on > the user type information, add it to constraints, etc. Once you're extending SQLite3 proper the referential integrity problem goes away (being no

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Scott Hess
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 1:54 AM, Dominique Devienne wrote: > On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Christopher Vance > wrote: >> If you really want your own types, you could always bundle with ASN.1 and >> store the result as a blob. > > Or Protobuf, or ... But you're back to option 1, you must

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Darko Volaric
Which sort of leads me to my next feature, which is bypassing the SQL language. Why use that crusty old syntax when it's equally expressible in JSON, XML or something else. Again I see it just as an API, callable by whatever parser you want, or none at all, if your code generates queries directly.

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Dominique Devienne
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 10:20 AM, Christopher Vance wrote: > If you really want your own types, you could always bundle with ASN.1 and > store the result as a blob. > Or Protobuf, or ... But you're back to option 1, you must store somewhere that knowledge, and it's an app-convention, SQL and

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Dominique Devienne
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 3:04 AM, Darko Volaric wrote: > In my case I'm already modifying and maintaining my own version of SQLite. > [...]. The last time I brought these ideas up I was > practically chased off by a mob waving pitchforks and torches. Apparently > almost no-one thinks user defined

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-04 Thread Darko Volaric
That's an entirely valid point, but didn't come up in the discussions if memory serves. It was the "you don't know what you're doing and don't understand databases" which I thought was an odd response, but that's all irrelevant. I agree that feature bloat is not a good idea (hello, PgSQL!) and I

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-03 Thread Nico Williams
On Wed, Jun 03, 2015 at 03:55:04PM -0700, Darko Volaric wrote: > I've tackled this problem from a couple of different angles. My goal was to > allow arbitrary user defined types, based on the builtin types (essentially > subtypes of the existing types), with a minimum of work and minimum >

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-03 Thread Darko Volaric
Yep, references a another one. Just like the functions, you have to join on the user type information, add it to constraints, etc. In my case I'm already modifying and maintaining my own version of SQLite. My project is basically a database with a lot of extensions. Submitting patches is not an

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-06-03 Thread Darko Volaric
I've tackled this problem from a couple of different angles. My goal was to allow arbitrary user defined types, based on the builtin types (essentially subtypes of the existing types), with a minimum of work and minimum disruption of the normal/existing use of the database and API. The approaches

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-05-27 Thread Matthias-Christian Ott
I want to define user-defined types, i.e. types not SQLite has not built-in and make sure that I didn't overlook something. Is it correct that values of user-defined types should be stored as text and have a collation defined if there is an order relation for the type if the type cannot be

[sqlite] User-defined types

2015-05-27 Thread Richard Hipp
On 5/27/15, Matthias-Christian Ott wrote: > > Is there another way to define user-defined types despite this method > and virtual tables? > I know of no other. -- D. Richard Hipp drh at sqlite.org