On 28 November 2010 05:51, Neil Jerram <n...@ossau.uklinux.net> wrote: > Linas Vepstas <linasveps...@gmail.com> writes: > >> Hi, >> >> On 25 November 2010 08:12, Andy Wingo <wi...@pobox.com> wrote: >>> >>> I just hacked up a new binding to sqlite. It works with sqlite3 and >>> Guile 1.9/2.0. Check it out at: >>> >>> http://gitorious.org/guile-sqlite3 >> >> I'd like to horn in on Andy's glory by advertising guile-dbi >> >> http://home.gna.org/guile-dbi/ >> >> which provides a consistent set of bindings to three different >> systems: Postgres, MySQL and SQLite3 >> >> Like Andy, I solicit patches/fixes/extensions. > > At the moment, I assume guile-dbi involves building C glue code?
Yes :-( > I like the backend-independence of the DBI interface, and I also like > Scheme code that I can just drop in and use without needing to compile > any C. > > So, personally, I'd generally favour merging these two bindings, and > evolving the other DBD implementations to use the new FFI. Although > probably also keeping the existing glue code implementation, as an > alternative to support older Guiles. Ah, yes, of course! I'm very unlikely to get around to this any time soon, but, for the record, is there an obvious URL documenting the new FFI technology? --linas
