--- Josiah Carlson <jcarlson@uci.edu> wrote:
It could, but I would happily bet you $100 that it won't.
Maybe not by 2010, but I'll make a gentlemen's bet that native SQL is in Python by 2005.
If you are really intent on getting this, despite the arguments against it (from everyone so far), you could add your own syntax with logix, which will handle arbitrary SQL statement and compile it into Python bytecode (given sufficient information on how to do so).
Ok, the logix approach to introducing new syntax is good to know. I thought my pain would at least resonate with a few people, but it obviously has not so far.
Yes, that's a cop-out, but sometimes the only way people get the language that they want is if they can add syntax at their whim. I've personally found that while I disagree with Guido on very many things related to Python, I'm usually too lazy to bother to add syntax I think I may need when I'm able to (with very minimal effort) write a helper function or two to do basically everything I need in lieu of syntax.
As I said in another reply, I have working code, so I don't NEED the syntax, just want it, think it's a good idea, and I hope I've picked the correct forum in expressing a sort of wouldn't-it-be-great-if-Python-did-this suggestion. My progression in programming has always been to think that the current paradigm was brilliant (even in my C++ days!), and then only to discover there were even better paradigms. ____________________________________________________________________________________Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links. http://mobile.yahoo.com/mobileweb/onesearch?refer=1ONXIC