Dmitry Olshansky Wrote: > On 14.10.2011 19:13, foobar wrote: > > Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote: > > > >> On 10/14/11 6:08 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > >>> On 2011-10-14 12:19, foobar wrote: > >>>> Has anyone looked at Nemerle's design for this? > >>>> They have an SQL macro which allows to write SQL such as: > >>>> > >>>> var employName = "FooBar" > >>>> SQL (DBconn, "select * from employees where name = $employName"); > >>>> > >>>> what that supposed to do is bind the variable(s) and it also validates > >>>> the sql query with the database. This is all done at compile-time. > >>>> > >>>> My understanding is that D's compile-time features are powerful enough > >>>> to implement this. > >>> > >>> You cannot connect to a database in D at compile time. You could some > >>> form of validation and escape the query without connecting to the > >>> database. > >> > >> A little SQL interpreter can be written that figures out e.g. the names > >> of the columns involved. > >> > >> Andrei > > > > The downsides with writing a separate SQL interpreter are: > > > > a) No connection to the DB means no way to validate the schema, e.g. the db > > might not even have a 'name' column in the employees table. > > The upside is that you can at least rebuild your app when database is > down or compile it on a separate machine. > > > b) No way to validate the SQL per the exact version the DB uses. E.g. LIMIT > > vs. TOP and also DB vendor specific extensions to SQL syntax. > > c) NIH - implementing your own SQL interpreter when the DB vendor already > > provides it. > > > > oh, well, perhaps it would be possible with D3 once it supports proper > > macros. In any case, such a macro probably would be built atop the DB API > > currently being discussed. > > > -- > Dmitry Olshansky
That's just silly, why would you use a validating SQL macro if you do not want (or don't have the environment set up) to validate the SQL?
