Jay Sprenkle said: > On 11/1/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> All of the arguments against my proposed changes are >> basically of the form that "this is not what the SQL standard >> says". They are theoretical arguments based on a world-view >> that holds that strong-typing is good and that it is the duty >> of database systems to enforce types. >> >> I do not hold to that world view. SQLite seeks a better way. > > I think it's a bit misleading to call the library "SQL-Lite: if you're > going to redesign > and not be like SQL. What do you think about creating a separate > project for a fast > light database engine that's not "SQL Like"?
I have an even better proposal: When you're writing your code, use tools appropriate to the job. For instance, languages like C, Pascal and BASIC are really good and handling arithmetic. Likewise, SQL and database engines are really good at data storage. So when you need to divide 5 by 2, it probably makes a lot of sense to do that in C/Pascal/BASIC than in SQL. And sure, there's cases where you can't avoid it. But usually you can. Clay Dowling -- Simple Content Management http://www.ceamus.com
