Re: [Ur] No sql_injectable(_prim) xbody (or xml in general).

Hello Peter, 2017-11-03 1:59 GMT+06:00 Peter Brottveit Bock : > Hi, > > It seems to me that it's not possible to store xml in a database. Is there > any reason for this? > > My understanding of ur/web is that the xml data type is—under the > hood—simply a string. I therefore

Re: [Ur] Ur record types as sets of fields

> On 3/11/2017, at 2:06 AM, Adam Chlipala wrote: > >> On 11/01/2017 08:26 PM, Anthony Clayden wrote: >> I'm wondering whether Ur's disjointness constraint might be used to build a >> record merge operator -- as needed for Relational Algebra Natural Join. >> >> Given two

Re: [Ur] No sql_injectable(_prim) xbody (or xml in general).

You're right that there are currently no type-class instances for storing XML in the SQL database.  At the moment, I can't remember any good reasons for not adding an instance for all [xml] types. I'll plan to do it, if no one adds a counterargument here in the next few days! On 11/02/2017

[Ur] No sql_injectable(_prim) xbody (or xml in general).

Hi, It seems to me that it's not possible to store xml in a database. Is there any reason for this? My understanding of ur/web is that the xml data type is—under the hood—simply a string. I therefore would have thought it would be trivial to store it in a database. As a minimal example:

Re: [Ur] Ur record types as sets of fields

On 11/01/2017 08:26 PM, Anthony Clayden wrote: I'm wondering whether Ur's disjointness constraint might be used to build a record merge operator -- as needed for Relational Algebra Natural Join. Given two records of type t1, t2 with (some) fields in common, some private; let's chop their