Interpolated strings and SQL

[Nickolay Bukreyev]

On Tuesday, 9 January 2024 at 08:29:08 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> It happens at runtime.

No. This line is inside `enum string query = () { ... }();`. So 
CTFE-performance considerations do apply.

> I'm sorry to say, that looks like tty noise.

That’s sad. In my opinion, it is at least as readable, plus I see 
a few objective advantages in it. We don’t have to agree on this 
though.

> It will rarely need to be escaped, but when one does need it, 
> one needs it!

Yes, but I see a benefit in reducing the number of characters 
that _have_ to be escaped in the first place. While `$` rarely 
appeared in examples we’ve been thinking of so far, if someone 
faces a need to create a string full of dollars, escaping them 
all will uglify the string.

> DIP1027 does not require ( ) if it's just an identifier. That 
> makes for the shortest, simplest
> istring syntax. The ( ) usage will be relatively rare. The idea 
> is the most common cases should
> require the least syntactical noise.

Totally agree. Personally, I prefer omitting parentheses in 
interpolations when a language supports such syntax, but it’s a 
matter of taste.

> Also, the reason I picked the SQL example is because that is 
> the one most cited as being needed
> and in showing the power of DIP1036 and because I was told that 
> DIP1027 couldn't do it :-)

DIP1027 is unable to do it _at compile time_. I cannot argue that 
compile-time string creation doesn’t give us much if we call an 
SQL engine afterwards. So we need another example where 
CTFE-ability is desired. Alexandru Ermicioi asked about logging; 
I agree it is nice to rule out format-string parsing from every 
`log` call.