On 9/11/06, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sure. But if you go back to the start of the thread you'll remember the > OP was originally complaining that SQLite was being promoted in the > Python docs as SQL compliant.
Define "SQL compliant." That's about as technically precise as saying that something tastes like chicken. Furthermore, I'm not responding to Python's representation of one thing or another. I am responding to some of the ridiculous and unfair criticisms directed at SQLite. Whatever Python did or didn't do, or whatever PySQLite does or doesn't do, SQLite doesn't deserve to be drug through the mud. > You shouldn't need to > add check constraints to verify that the value stored in an integer > column is actually an integer. You should if your using SQLite, and this is clearly documented: http://www.sqlite.org/datatype3.html. > I don't think anyone is trying to suggest that SQLite isn't a prefectly > good tool for many purposes: it's far more sophisticated than bsddb, for > example, and I've used both it and Gadfly (which has similar > deficiencies when compared to strict standards) with complete satisfaction. Then what does calling it crappy and goofy suggest? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
