On 11/3/05, Dennis Cote <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree that moving away from the standard is a bad thing, but this
> change does not in any way merit forking SQLite or changing its name.
> SQLite currently deviates from the standard in much more significant
> ways than this proposed (well
Jay Sprenkle wrote:
Since SQL conformance is hard to legitimately define (Are we
going to conform to cj date, mysql, oracle, etc.) you're right,
it would be hard.
I believe my original suggestion still has value:
If DRH is going to radically change SQLite (removing/redefining typing
and
e proposed spilt will suffer and one or both will
> eventually wither and die.
>
> Fred
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Jay Sprenkle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 9:35 AM
> > To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
> > Subject:
lly wither and die.
Fred
> -Original Message-
> From: Jay Sprenkle [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, November 03, 2005 9:35 AM
> To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
> Subject: Re: [sqlite] type confusion
>
>
> Since SQL conformance is hard to legitimately define (Ar
Since SQL conformance is hard to legitimately define (Are we
going to conform to cj date, mysql, oracle, etc.) you're right,
it would be hard.
I believe my original suggestion still has value:
If DRH is going to radically change SQLite (removing/redefining typing
and redoing the expression
Your suggestions would require a lot of work. Considering this
free software I thought you would like to spearhead this SQL
conformance effort. I think it would be very valuable.
--- Jay Sprenkle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > We look forward to your standards compliance branch, Jay.
> >
> We look forward to your standards compliance branch, Jay.
> Please tell us when we can expect to download your version.
DRH suggested a change, I put in my two cents since his message
included a call for commentary. If you don't like the suggestion please
feel free to ignore it or give a
We look forward to your standards compliance branch, Jay.
Please tell us when we can expect to download your version.
--- Jay Sprenkle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I proposed splitting the project into two branches so people who wanted
> standards compliance and the people who wanted ease of
> > Subject: Re: [sqlite] Proposed 3.3.0 changes. Was: 5/2==2
>
> > > So don't make the field 10 bytes long, make it only 8. SQLite won't
> > > care a bit, and will give you the value in whatever format you want.
> >
> > Then it's not type agnostic any more. You now have an 8 byte numeric
> > and
9 matches
Mail list logo
