If you really want your own types, you could always bundle with ASN.1 and store the result as a blob.
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 4:52 PM, Dominique Devienne <ddevienne at gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 3:04 AM, Darko Volaric <lists at darko.org> wrote: > > > In my case I'm already modifying and maintaining my own version of > SQLite. > > [...]. The last time I brought these ideas up I was > > practically chased off by a mob waving pitchforks and torches. Apparently > > almost no-one thinks user defined types is a good idea so there is no > point > > sharing it. I don't expect anyone to help me maintain the code. > > > FWIW, I think UDTs are a great idea. But also > - optional static typing of columns; > - checksums of blocks;- > - blob two-tier storage (a la Oracle); > - native indexing of virtual table; > - native JSON support; > - etc... > > Yes, the community, just like the authors, of SQLite have a strong bias > against changes and to keep SQLite "lite". > > And can be brutal in how they say it (or ignore it) when someone rants > about his pet-peeves, or try to push forward his wish list (including me > above). > > But remember that SQLite didn't have FKs for a long time. Didn't have CTE. > Both of which are major enhancements. So there's hope long term IMHO :). > > Now unlike most (including me again), you go further and actually code it > up apparently. That's great. But it's hard to fork SQLite and get any > traction given the fast-paced refactoring/optimization the main code goes > through. And also UDTs can have widespread side effects within SQLite, hard > to gauge w/o having the whole code-base and design in ones head like DRH. > Might be good enough for you, but not for the high quality standards which > is a hallmark of SQLite IMHO. All I can suggest is continue communicating > and perhaps also OSS your changes on GitHub or similar, and you may get > help somehow. > > I suspect (hope really) first-class UDTs in SQLite (as Nico calls them) > haven't been dismissed, and it's more a question of finding the time and > funding to do them right, i.e. in a "lite" way that doesn't adversely > affect SQLite if you don't use them, and thoroughly tested as usual. My > $0.02. --DD > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > sqlite-users at mailinglists.sqlite.org > http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users > -- Christopher Vance
