Is it just me, or is Sqlite3 goofy?

Mike Owens mikeowens at gmail.com
Tue Sep 12 16:24:08 CEST 2006


On 11 Sep 2006 21:35:28 -0700, mensanator at aol.com <mensanator at aol.com> wrote:
> Mike Owens wrote:
> > On 11 Sep 2006 18:23:50 -0700, mensanator at aol.com <mensanator at aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Can you run your car on diesel fuel?
> > >
> > > Why not?
> > >
> > > Because your car's specification says to use gasoline?
> > >
> > > If your car has been designed to run on diesel, you shouldn't
> > > be saying it has gasoline engine. Duh.
> >
> > No but you can still call it a car with an engine, just as SQLite is a
> > SQL database, with an SQL engine.
>
> Seperate the data from the engine and what have you got?
> Data with dynamic typing. Data that can't be migrated to
> a "real" SQL database because you'll get type mismatches
> when strings are inserted into numeric fields. The type affinity
> kluge won't help there, will it?

Did you even read my original post? Or did you just completely miss the point?

> It's not the job of the System Test Engineer to design things.
> It's his job to find fault with everything. I just happen to be very
> good at finding faults with things.

And apparently not very good at providing any constructive solutions.

> But no one appreciates my finding those faults.

No one appreciates the tone in which you report these alleged faults,
necessarily agrees with the faults that you find, nor elected you
system test engineer of the SQLite project.

> > It calls for other things that many databases don't implement or
> > altogether violate as well, so what? Show me how both MS SQL's T-SQL
> > and Oracle's PL/SQL procedure languages are so standards compliant
> > that you can use the same procedure code in both databases. You can't
> > -- precisely because they ignore or outright violate parts of the
> > standard as well. What's your position on that? Do some Googling and
> > you can easily find 18 ways that Oracle's PL/SQL deviates from the
> > standard. And T-SQL is plainly nowhere close.
>
> And how many of those systems use dynamic typing?

And how many conform to the standard?

> Name one where the documentation claims the SQL Language
> Specification is a bug.

Name one that conforms to the standard.

> And a lot of people go to chiropractors. And chiropractors are
> nice intelligent people with degrees. And the therapy provided
> does good.
>
> Nevertheless, the theory on which it's based is quackery.

To use your specious analogy, it represents another way of doing
things, which you admit yourself works. That's your justification for
calling Richard Hipp a crackpot?

> > It's clear. You're just way too smart for SQLite.
>
> Did you see my solution to Rick Shepard's problem in the
> thread "Parsing String, Dictionary Lookups, Writing to
> Database Table"?

The point being? -- you can write Python code and feel entitled to
condescending and rude?



More information about the Python-list mailing list