Re: [Chicken-users] DBI

[Peter Bex]

On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 02:40:54PM -0600, Ozzi Lee wrote:
> > In reality, though, I think portability between databases is more
> > hypothetical than real.  Projects typically start with one database and
> > stick to it, for moving between databases *even if a portability layer
> > is in use* turns out to be hard -- all sorts of stuff outside the main
> > code base ends up changing (path names, load scripts, whatever).
> 
> I agree that portability isn't that great in practice. I'd like to see a 
> DBI egg for two reasons:
> 
> 1. Starting out on a project, 90% of the time I'll use SQLite, because 
> it's the easiest. Often I'll want to switch to MySQL once things get 
> rolling. A single DBI interface makes this quite a bit easier.
> 
> 2. For quick and dirty scripts that need to access a database, it would 
> be nice to have to keep in the differences between the different interfaces.

I'd like to add a third:

3. Even if individual *projects* choose a particular database implementation,
   any given *library* or *framework* should be database-agnostic, wherever
   possible.  This gives people who use your library/framework the freedom to
   choose their database for their projects.

Cheers,
Peter
-- 
http://sjamaan.ath.cx
--
"The process of preparing programs for a digital computer
 is especially attractive, not only because it can be economically
 and scientifically rewarding, but also because it can be an aesthetic
 experience much like composing poetry or music."
                                                        -- Donald Knuth

pgp6cs8yeg2Og.pgp
Description: PGP signature