public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Federico Di Gregorio <[email protected]>
To: Daniele Varrazzo <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Plans for 2.8
Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2018 16:08:54 +0200
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+mi_8ZEveFa6bLHZc58gw5M3fb8bQSXe-FiPTFPDtVfknNJCA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+mi_8auWr+u4DwLGnu3JOu=jhMAV_8OPnMtMuXOr+0iMN5LgA@mail.gmail.com>
<[email protected]>
<CA+mi_8ZEveFa6bLHZc58gw5M3fb8bQSXe-FiPTFPDtVfknNJCA@mail.gmail.com>
On 10/04/2018 04:05 PM, Daniele Varrazzo wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 2:27 PM Federico Di Gregorio<[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 10/04/2018 02:38 PM, Daniele Varrazzo wrote:
>>> A tiny improvement to SQL generation is already ready^W merged in
>>> #732: it will be possible to use `Identifier("schema", "name")` which
>>> would be rendered in dotted notation in the query. Currently
>>> `Identifier()` takes a single param so this extension is backward
>>> compatible and there is no need to introduce a new `Composable` type
>>> to represent dotted sequences of identifiers.
>> I understand that from a compatibility point of view everything works
>> with the "schema", "name" order of arguments (you just switch on the
>> number of arguments) but usually such approach causes infinite headaches
>> when you remove or add the namespace from the call.
>>
>> `Identifier(name, schema=None)` is better, IMHO because makes explicit
>> that the mandatory and first argument is always the identifier itself,
>> while the schema is optional.
> "schema", "table" is only an example: it could be "table"."field",
> even "schema"."table"."field", or "extension"."setting"... The object
> only wants to represent a dotted sequence of identifiers, at lexical
> level, nothing with semantics attached such as "an optionally
> schema-qualified table name" or "a field name". If the object was
> `Table()` or `Field()` rather than `Identifier()` I'd totally agree
> with you.
Sorry, I misread your example. Obviously you're right.
federico
p.s. yep, I'll remove all the old cruft from sandbox.
--
Federico Di Gregorio [email protected]
DNDG srl http://dndg.it
The number of the beast: vi vi vi. -- Delexa Jones
view thread (8+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: Plans for 2.8
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox