SQL combinator DSL Lassi Kortela (18 Sep 2019 11:08 UTC)
Re: SQL combinator DSL Alaric Snell-Pym (18 Sep 2019 12:58 UTC)
Re: SQL combinator DSL John Cowan (18 Sep 2019 22:31 UTC)

SQL combinator DSL Lassi Kortela 18 Sep 2019 11:08 UTC

Can we cautiously establish general agreement that a domain-specific
langauge of safe SQL combinators is a requirement for basic sanity
working with databases in Scheme?

I.e. non-DSL use of SQL could be regarded as something similar to unsafe
or optimized primitives in a high-level language implementation: crucial
to have, but usually best to avoid and hide behind safe wrappers.

If we can have this agreement, we could start exploring a DSL with the
people we have on board now.

I don't mind it has engine-specific extensions as well. E.g. if Postgres
has extensions that people use all the time for real work, why not add
them in. I imagine any extensions are also safer and easier to use with
a good DSL than without.

Thoughts?