seth@cql.com seth@cql.com
Sun, 26 Jan 2003 10:04:45 -0700 (MST)

I have some code I've been working on to access my own SQL engine.  The issues
should be identical with accessing another engine.

I think a simpler and better solution is to use the fully qualified column
name, which has to be unique.  This conforms to the ANSI standard, which is
always a plus.  Thus you have a column name like owner.table.columnName.  The
dots can be replaced by underscores in an environment where the dots cause

On 26-Jan-2003 Dominic Steinitz wrote:
> Having used HToolkit successfully to extract information from a MySQL
> database, I am painfully aware of the limitations of sending embedded SQL
> strings and finding out at runtime that something didn't quite work (in an
> often subtle and difficult to track down way).
> I'd love to be able to put HaskellDB on top of HToolkit. There are two
> approaches: i) add extensible records to ghc or ii) modify HaskellDB so it
> uses Haskell records not extensible records (I'd have modify HaskellDB
> anyway to use HToolkit rather than talk to ODBC directly). The latter sounds
> as though it might be more feasible that the former. Having read the paper
> and briefly looked at the code, I assume the extensibility is required if
> you have two tables each with the same column name and therefore you want to
> use the same label in two different records. Obviously you can't do this
> with Haskell records as the labels become top level functions. However, if I
> rename labels then I won't have this problem. For example, if I have two
> tables, passwd and notify each containing a column called email then I could
> have labels notifyEmail and passwdEmail and remember that they really
> referred to email.
> Does anyone have any views on this?
> Dominic Steinitz
> _______________________________________________
> Libraries mailing list
> Libraries@haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries

Seth Kurtzberg
M. I. S. Corp.
E-Mail: seth@cql.com
Date: 26-Jan-2003
Time: 10:01:05

This message was sent by XFMail