Was: [WebDNA] Wishlist: ignore whitespace in database changes - Now: WebDNA Data Model
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2016
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 112953
interpreted = N
texte = 540 My opinion here is that I agree with you both. Both the plight (struggle) and the benefit of WebDNA is that it is it's=20 own solution, a unique way of thinking that was created really before=20 standards were created. When I work on PHP / MySQL, or Javascript and other languages for a few=20 months, then try to go back to WebDNA, I'm always typing quotes in=20 values, or forgetting things like setting type, etc. However, When I'm working on strictly WebDNA stuff, it is indeed a sort=20 of free and creative experience that I enjoy. The important point to me is that WebDNA has to support the standards=20 or it will never gain a piece of the pie.. more than that, there are=20 times, as people have expressed here, where a traditional database is=20 just a better fit for the project. That is no knock to WebDNA. You have=20 to realize that the web world runs on databases like MySQL, and for good=20 reason.. so WebDNA needs to support it. On 2016-08-31 14:57, christophe.billiottet@webdna.us wrote: > I personally believe this extra flexibility allows to deal with > database content the way we want, and allows to treat a single field > either as a date, a number or a text field, or even the tree types in > a single page of code. > > I think extra rigidity diminishes creativity, and what I like most in > WebDNA is that it behave like a "chameleon" language. It is so > flexible that you can do whatever you want with it, the way you want. > > I would be interested to read what others have to say about this > requested modification, > > - chris > > > > > >> On Aug 31, 2016, at 20:08, Brian Burton
wrote: >> >> Over the years I=E2=80=99ve been bending WebDNA to my will. I=E2=80=99= ve more or=20 >> less successfully implemented the view and controller ideology of an=20 >> MVC framework in WebDNA, and am getting ever closer to doing the work=20 >> to get data models working in webDNA. It=E2=80=99s so frustrating in 2= 016 to=20 >> not be able to tag a field in a database as unique or numeric and let=20 >> the language deal with it for you when you interact with the database.= =20 >> I recently wasted more time then I care to admit to making [delete=20 >> db=3Dsomedb&leIDdata=3D10000] work because i forgot to add &IDtype=3Dn= um to=20 >> the code. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us > Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us --------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us .
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
540 My opinion here is that I agree with you both. Both the plight (struggle) and the benefit of WebDNA is that it is it's=20 own solution, a unique way of thinking that was created really before=20 standards were created. When I work on PHP / MySQL, or Javascript and other languages for a few=20 months, then try to go back to WebDNA, I'm always typing quotes in=20 values, or forgetting things like setting type, etc. However, When I'm working on strictly WebDNA stuff, it is indeed a sort=20 of free and creative experience that I enjoy. The important point to me is that WebDNA has to support the standards=20 or it will never gain a piece of the pie.. more than that, there are=20 times, as people have expressed here, where a traditional database is=20 just a better fit for the project. That is no knock to WebDNA. You have=20 to realize that the web world runs on databases like MySQL, and for good=20 reason.. so WebDNA needs to support it. On 2016-08-31 14:57, christophe.billiottet@webdna.us wrote: > I personally believe this extra flexibility allows to deal with > database content the way we want, and allows to treat a single field > either as a date, a number or a text field, or even the tree types in > a single page of code. > > I think extra rigidity diminishes creativity, and what I like most in > WebDNA is that it behave like a "chameleon" language. It is so > flexible that you can do whatever you want with it, the way you want. > > I would be interested to read what others have to say about this > requested modification, > > - chris > > > > > >> On Aug 31, 2016, at 20:08, Brian Burton wrote: >> >> Over the years I=E2=80=99ve been bending WebDNA to my will. I=E2=80=99= ve more or=20 >> less successfully implemented the view and controller ideology of an=20 >> MVC framework in WebDNA, and am getting ever closer to doing the work=20 >> to get data models working in webDNA. It=E2=80=99s so frustrating in 2= 016 to=20 >> not be able to tag a field in a database as unique or numeric and let=20 >> the language deal with it for you when you interact with the database.= =20 >> I recently wasted more time then I care to admit to making [delete=20 >> db=3Dsomedb&leIDdata=3D10000] work because i forgot to add &IDtype=3Dn= um to=20 >> the code. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to > the mailing list . > To unsubscribe, E-mail to: > archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us > Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us --------------------------------------------------------- This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list . To unsubscribe, E-mail to: archives: http://mail.webdna.us/list/talk@webdna.us Bug Reporting: support@webdna.us .
dbrooke@euca.us
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
[WebDNA] sudo and shell (2010)
encryption madness (2003)
PCS Emailer's role ? (1997)
RE: groups and [ShowNext] (1997)
another problem (1997)
Cookie Expires - nevermind (2004)
[searchString] (1997)
[Sum] function? (1997)
WCS Newbie question (1997)
[WebDNA] grep again (2010)
contextual shownext (1998)
return missing item (was:WebCat Sales) (1997)
WC2b15 File Corruption (1997)
WebCat2 - Getting to the browser's username/password data (1997)
WebCat2b12 Mac.acgi--[searchstring] bug (1997)
template cache problem (1998)
Cool XML/XSLT tool .. (2002)
WebCat2b13MacPlugIn - [include] doesn't allow creator (1997)
Newbie Tax Question (1997)
Web Developer Product Awards (1997)