Roger Binns wrote: > Jean-Christophe Deschamps wrote: > >> I'd like to have the group opinion about a feature I would find utterly >> useful in _standard_ SQLite. >> > > You are aware that "standard" SQLite is used in devices with a few > kilobytes of memory through workstations and servers with gigabytes of it! > >
Whether he is aware of that or not is largely irrelevant, though I suspect he is aware of this fact. He is asking for support for a mechanism that will provide most, if not all, the benefits of the ICU extension using much less memory and far fewer CPU cycles. This would benefit the users of small devices more than those using workstations, but it could be beneficial to all. It would be almost universally beneficial if it could be omitted using a compiler define. Then even the small additional overhead of his proposal wouldn't impact those users who have no need for anything beyond ASCII. > As far as I can tell you want some extra "standard" collation sequences > and propose shortcuts that will get them mostly right. And you want > someone else to write the code! > No, he is asking for standard support for "user defined" collating sequences. And, yes, he wants some else to write the code since it (like many other facilities) is not nearly as useful if it is not included in the standard SQLite released by Richard. He has even offered to pay to have it developed. > SQLite makes it very easy to have extensions and to register them. For > example see http://sqlite.org/c3ref/auto_extension.html > > Generally the best approach would be to produce the code as an > extension, document and test it well and then add to the contributions > page at http://sqlite.org/contrib - once enough developers have used it > and vouched for its utility then it would be far easier to lobby for > incorporation into the "standard" SQLite. > The problem with extensions is precisely that they are not universally available. If my application uses an extension to provide collation sequences, then I can not safely use any of the many GUI database browsers to manipulate the data since the GUI browser won't have access to the extension functions. > For you to convince me of the utility of the code, you'd need to list > which locales it gets right and which it gets wrong. Software can seem > pretty dumb to users almost getting some things right. > > His proposal doesn't rely on locales. It uses "user defined" strings to define a collating sequence. It will be right where you can define a collating sequence using a string, and a suitable string is defined. He has already said that it won't be suitable for multiple byte characters or many other languages. For those cases where it is not suitable, a user could continue to use the ICU extension just as they can now. Dennis Cote _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
