Brian,
On 2 June 2007 at 19:08, Prof Brian Ripley wrote:
| There are quite a few 'db API' features in RODBC that are not in DBI.
Random idea of the day: Would it be wortwhile to re-think what the DBI API
should cover?
These days, it may matter less to be R and S-Plus compatible [1] but e.g. to
me it matters whether I get niceties like POSIXct times in and out of
databases intact, and that doesn't seem be a concern per se for DBI.
A unified DBI interface is still the right idea, but I'd like to push the
feature set further. But then I know little about the gory details so feel
free to correct me.
Regards, Dirk
[1] (or, given who accrues benefits from this, we could make it Insightful's
concern to catch up)
--
Hell, there are no rules here - we're trying to accomplish something.
-- Thomas A. Edison
_______________________________________________
R-sig-Geo mailing list
R-sig-Geo@stat.math.ethz.ch
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-geo
