[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] DBI
From: |
Graham Fawcett |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] DBI |
Date: |
Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:05:58 -0500 |
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 9:54 AM, Peter Bex <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 09:47:08AM -0500, Graham Fawcett wrote:
> > Yes, input port was what I was thinking. Thanks. The input port would
> > return the body of the LOB and return #!eof when it's consumed.
> >
> > The "Chicken blob or string" options are redundant, so the revised
> > proposal is to represent a LOB with a thunk that evaluates to an input
> > port.
>
> Why the thunk? (why not directly the port?)
Laziness: it avoids the overhead of setting up the input port if it's
not required. You might want to iterate over a set of (id, name, blob)
records and only open the blob if the name meets some criteria that
are local to the app (i.e. can't be expressed in a WHERE clause).
Best,
Graham
- Re: [Chicken-users] New immediate values (was: DBI), (continued)
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, felix winkelmann, 2008/02/29
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Graham Fawcett, 2008/02/29
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Tobia Conforto, 2008/02/29
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Graham Fawcett, 2008/02/27
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Vincent Manis, 2008/02/27
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Peter Bex, 2008/02/28
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Graham Fawcett, 2008/02/28
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Peter Bex, 2008/02/28
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI,
Graham Fawcett <=
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Peter Bex, 2008/02/28
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Graham Fawcett, 2008/02/28
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Ozzi Lee, 2008/02/27
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Alaric Snell-Pym, 2008/02/28
Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Vincent Manis, 2008/02/27
Re: argument against using '() for null values? ([Chicken-users] DBI), Ozzi, 2008/02/27
Re: argument against using '() for null values? ([Chicken-users] DBI), Graham Fawcett, 2008/02/27