-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 21/03/16 03:32, Dominique Devienne wrote:
> SQLite tries to be compatible with non-standard extensions from
> various popular RDBMS', but when a standard alternative exists, it
> should be preferred IMHO. --DD

That depends on the code and project.  In my case the code is not
database independent nor is it intended to be.  (If I wanted that I'd
use or reinvent something like SQLAlchemy.)

The code also depends on the SQLite "dynamic typing" feature - that
the type belongs to the value, not the column or variable it is being
stored in.  This matches exactly how Python does typing as well as the
real world data I work with.(*)

The SQLite API also has progress hooks, a transaction model
(savepoints), backup API and numerous other unique to it features.
When using SQLite I use it to the full extent appropriate.

(*) Please don't derail this about typing.  Dynamic typing and strong
typing are not the same thing, although Python has both and SQLite
mostly only has the former.

Roger

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iEYEARECAAYFAlbwK1sACgkQmOOfHg372QQK2wCfdoUaHyORGq00BmWAOF4r3rdQ
SNYAnAnMR0EB7Ny38bnqrMcGL+MwAoJU
=DeUQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply via email to