I disagree with adding version info or dates of inclusion for things are
added to the language. The fact that the code is there should be good
enough, and if you need to know when something was added/removed/modified,
the aforementioned doc will tell you. When something was added isn't as
importa
The changes.html page is fine, but I would rather see something on the
'WITH clause' page itself.
PHP online doc is a good example of how it can be done.
Otherwise it would be like the Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy where the
plans for the destruction of Earth were available for all to view and
http://www.sqlite.org/changes.html
2014-02-03 (3.8.3)
•Added support for common table expressions and the WITH clause.
--
--
--
--Ô¿Ô--
K e V i N
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 8:46 AM, HarryD wrote:
> I find it something of a shortcoming that the doc pages (
> http://www.s
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 2:53 PM, Stephan Beal wrote:
> fossil has its own built-in copy of sqlite. It sounds like you're using
> one which was built with the --internal-sqlite=0 flag.
>
My UTMOST apologies - i'm confusing traffic from two lists here (and
thought yours was for the fossil list).
On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 2:46 PM, HarryD wrote:
> I find it something of a shortcoming that the doc pages (
> http://www.sqlite.org/lang_with.html) do not mention the applicable
> version
> of sqlite.
>
> Example: I read about the 'with clause'. Exciting! But when trying it, it
> didn't work bec
I find it something of a shortcoming that the doc pages (
http://www.sqlite.org/lang_with.html) do not mention the applicable version
of sqlite.
Example: I read about the 'with clause'. Exciting! But when trying it, it
didn't work because I am using an older version. Not that old but still old
e
6 matches
Mail list logo
