* Tels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-07-13 21:50]: > On Thursday 13 July 2006 19:40, A. Pagaltzis wrote: > > * Tels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-07-12 19:00]: > > > Using SQLite or similiar is what really creates the > > > problems with CPANTS - you cant just access the raw > > > database without the front-end. > > > > All you need is one binary from www.sqlite.org – I don’t > > follow why this is a problem. And I certainly prefer talking > > SQL at a database than writing throwaway helper script code > > to manipulate serialised data structures. > > But what if the DB isn't SQL?
I have no idea how that question relates to anything I said. > And it can change at a whim? I have no idea how you can accomodate every possible form of storage backend unless you build an internal model of your data and then write mappers to serialise it to all these storage formats. Now, you are welcome to do that, but I’d prefer to get some work done instead of spending my time boiling the ocean. Premature generalisation if the root of all bloat. If you really do need this level of genericity, you can always refactor later, with practice telling you just which abstractions you need. But until then? YAGNI. > > > Of course for performance reasons it might not be good, but > > > since premature optimization is the root of all evil, I'd > > > say use YAML now, change when nec. > > > > Who cares about performance – I don’t want to have to write > > code to walk data structures just to ask questions about a > > heap of records. Sometimes with an in-memory data structure I > > resort to DBD::RAM instead of writing endless chains of maps, > > greps and foreach loops just because SQL is so much lazier. > > > > SQLite is a godsend. (drh++) > > But how can you then switch the database backend if the user > doesn't want to use helper scripts or the OO interface? Are you reading the same message that I wrote? Because your questions aren’t making any sense to me. Where I did I say anything about requiring the use of helper scripts or an OO interface? Wasn’t that’s exactly what I said I’d prefer be avoided? > I see I wont ever be able to please people that prefer their > access raw and without a layer in between then. I have no idea what “raw access” means. I cannot figure out how you can have data that has no particular representation. Please explain. Regards, -- Aristotle Pagaltzis // <http://plasmasturm.org/>
