[DB-SIG] Type code mappings: expanding the type objects

Federico Di Gregorio fog at initd.org
Thu Jan 8 07:00:59 EST 2004

Il gio, 2004-01-08 alle 12:54, M.-A. Lemburg ha scritto:
> Add fields to .description is problematic. Applications tend
> to use tuple unpacking to access the tuples in that list and
> adding fields would break this.

mm.. you're right. but encoding information is something that i would
like to see in DBAPI 2.1 or 3.0.

btw, are we talking about 2.1 or 3.0? in my head the "more types"
discussion is 2.1 but if we add all the other stuff related to types i
think we go a great deal toward 3.0. i ask because i think we can't have
any incompatible changes in 2.1 but maybe a little backward
incompatibility in 2.0->3.0 would not be that bad.


Federico Di Gregorio                         http://people.initd.org/fog
Debian GNU/Linux Developer                                fog at debian.org
INIT.D Developer                                           fog at initd.org
              La felicità è una tazza di cioccolata calda. Sempre. -- Io
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Questa parte del messaggio =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=E8?= firmata
Url : http://mail.python.org/pipermail/db-sig/attachments/20040108/6fdbf2d7/attachment-0001.bin

More information about the DB-SIG mailing list