[std.database]

[Sean Kelly]

On Oct 9, 2011, at 3:56 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

> On 10/9/11 5:31 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 10/9/2011 5:28 AM, Piotr Szturmaj wrote:
>>> 1. I think that we should not design this API using the least common
>>> denominator
>>> approach. This is to not limit some databases. For example PostgreSQL
>>> has many
>>> great features not available in MySQL. That's why I started with
>>> postgres in my
>>> ddb project. I think DB API should be designed to support the most
>>> featureful
>>> databases and those that have less features may be easily adapted to
>>> that API.
>> 
>> 
>> Haven't common denominator designs been more or less failures in at
>> least one category - gui libraries?
> 
> A common database interface is not a common denominator API; more like the opposite. This is not difficult because most differences across database systems lie in their SQL, which is strings from D's perspective.

Assuming that by "database" you mean SQL.  Pretty fair assumption, though NoSQL databases (which cover a broad range of designs since there's no standard language yet for key-value DBs, etc) are rapidly gaining popularity.  I almost wonder if the base type should be named SqlDatabase instead of Database.