|
|
|
|
|
by taeric
819 days ago
|
|
I'd expect that for most SQL that is being inlined in code, you could get by with only supporting a subset of what is possible. I also have no doubt you could easily sabotage the effort by trying to support every dialect of sql in a smart way. :D I'm also curious on the idea of having a string parsed at runtime and why that is necessarily better? Sounds like this is essentially dynamic typing? Where they are calling it branded, instead of dynamic? At first, I confess the idea sounded close to a tagged union. You have to have something in the data to indicate the tag; but I guess it is missing the union part? Definitely looks close to the idea of treating "objects" as maps. Neat idea, thanks for sharing! |
|