-----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-----
