> And yes, you might think (like me) that this is silly and they should
> just fix it, warning people about the new way for a good few versions,
> and then just roll it out. But, that would mean there will exist schemas
Hmmm... but what kind of compatibility issues would you see if SQLite stored
values exactly as provided and did the conversion upon reading? I.e. "INSERT
... ('3.0')" would actually store a string. When reading this string with a
numeric parameter, the conversion can still be done. This way, I would of
course still have the same problem, but I had a chance to correct my mistake in
existing databases reading with explicit CASTs.
But there are other issues where SQLite corrected mistakes that were done
before. Think of the "pragma foreign_key_check" for example. One could fix data
type issues in a similar way without affecting compatibility. And those who
rely on a special interpretation of non-standard SQL (like putting strings and
expecting them to be treated as numbers) will always have the option to stay on
"their" SQLite version.
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
