[GSOC] Database API draft proposal

[Fawzi Mohamed]

On 3-apr-11, at 15:59, Christian Manning wrote:

> On 03/04/2011 14:42, Piotr Szturmaj wrote:
>> Fawzi Mohamed wrote:
>>> Well the comments in there are what is important, and will need to  
>>> be
>>> specified better IMHO.
>>>
>>> The most important part in my opinion is how one chooses to  
>>> represent a
>>> record.
>>> A big design choice is if the various fields are defined at  
>>> compile time
>>> or at runtime.
>>> Also how does one add special behavior to a record? Do you use a
>>> subclasses of the generic record type (as ruby does for example)?
>>
>> I'm working on DB API for few months in my spare time. I'm delayed  
>> that
>> much by my other projects. Please take a look at my ideas:
>>
>> http://github.com/pszturmaj/ddb
>>
>> Documentation:
>> http://pszturmaj.github.com/ddb/db.html
>> http://pszturmaj.github.com/ddb/postgres.html
>>
>> In my code, row is represented using struct DBRow!(Specs...).  
>> Fields may
>> be known at compile time or not. DBRow besides base types, may be
>> instantiated using structs, tuples or arrays. Untyped row (no compile
>> time information) is DBRow!(Variant[]).
>>
>> Typed rows are very useful, for example you don't need to manually  
>> cast
>> columns to your types, it's done automatically, e.g.:
>>
>> auto cmd = new PGCommand(conn, "SELECT typname, typlen FROM  
>> pg_type");
>> auto result = cmd.executeQuery!(string, "typName", int, "len");
>>
>> foreach (row; result)
>> {
>> // here, row DBRow subtypes
>> // a Tuple!(string, "typName", int, "len")
>> writeln(row.typName, ", ", row.len);
>> }
>>
>> What do you think? :)
>
> I was going to reply with a link to your work but you beat me to it.
> I think it's a great design and incorporating it or something  
> similar into the API may be the way to go.

Indeed ddb looks really nice (I hadn't looked at it yet), given it  
though, I have to agree that just adding mySQL support is too little  
and not really innovative for 3 months work...

Fawzi