Re: [WebDNA] Wishlist: ignore whitespace in database changes
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2016
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 112945
interpreted = N
texte = 532 I completely agree on the flexibility of manipulating data in variables. = I love the simplicity of doing silly things like [text]age=3D27[/text] = and then [showif [age]>18]=20 (which strictly speaking shouldn=E2=80=99t be legal since age is a = numeric value in a "text" variable.) If anything the [text] tag should be called [variable] to be more = accurate about what=E2=80=99s being stored in it, i.e. unknown variable = data=E2=80=A6=20 That being said, I completely disagree when it comes to storing and = retrieving information in a data structure. If i have a field in a data = structure (read: SQL data table or WebDNA database) that is for storing = dates, then allowing someone to store "yesterday" is nonsensical and = causes problems when I try to retrieve dates based on a calculation. = (i.e. leMODDATEdata=3D12/31/2015) Of course I should write code that = stops this data from being stored in the first place, but as a last = resort the database program itself should defend the database to protect = the integrity of the data stored in it. The side effect, which almost = outweighs the protection factor to be candid, is that when retrieving = info, if each field has a predefined data type, the database already = knows how to deal with searches so the programmer doesn't have to = reiterate for each search that this field is a date, or a number, or = whatever.=20 Just my two cents.=20 -Brian B. Burton > On Aug 31, 2016, at 2:57 PM, christophe.billiottet@webdna.us wrote: >=20 > 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. >=20 > 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. >=20 > I would be interested to read what others have to say about this = requested modification, >=20 > - chris >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >> On Aug 31, 2016, at 20:08, Brian Burton
wrote: >>=20 >> Over the years I=E2=80=99ve been bending WebDNA to my will. I=E2=80=99v= e more or less successfully implemented the view and controller ideology = of an MVC framework in WebDNA, and am getting ever closer to doing the = work to get data models working in webDNA. It=E2=80=99s so frustrating = in 2016 to not be able to tag a field in a database as unique or numeric = and let the language deal with it for you when you interact with the = database. I recently wasted more time then I care to admit to making = [delete db=3Dsomedb&leIDdata=3D10000] work because i forgot to add = &IDtype=3Dnum to the code. >=20 >=20 >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------- > 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:
532 I completely agree on the flexibility of manipulating data in variables. = I love the simplicity of doing silly things like [text]age=3D27[/text] = and then [showif [age]>18]=20 (which strictly speaking shouldn=E2=80=99t be legal since age is a = numeric value in a "text" variable.) If anything the [text] tag should be called [variable] to be more = accurate about what=E2=80=99s being stored in it, i.e. unknown variable = data=E2=80=A6=20 That being said, I completely disagree when it comes to storing and = retrieving information in a data structure. If i have a field in a data = structure (read: SQL data table or WebDNA database) that is for storing = dates, then allowing someone to store "yesterday" is nonsensical and = causes problems when I try to retrieve dates based on a calculation. = (i.e. leMODDATEdata=3D12/31/2015) Of course I should write code that = stops this data from being stored in the first place, but as a last = resort the database program itself should defend the database to protect = the integrity of the data stored in it. The side effect, which almost = outweighs the protection factor to be candid, is that when retrieving = info, if each field has a predefined data type, the database already = knows how to deal with searches so the programmer doesn't have to = reiterate for each search that this field is a date, or a number, or = whatever.=20 Just my two cents.=20 -Brian B. Burton > On Aug 31, 2016, at 2:57 PM, christophe.billiottet@webdna.us wrote: >=20 > 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. >=20 > 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. >=20 > I would be interested to read what others have to say about this = requested modification, >=20 > - chris >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >=20 >> On Aug 31, 2016, at 20:08, Brian Burton wrote: >>=20 >> Over the years I=E2=80=99ve been bending WebDNA to my will. I=E2=80=99v= e more or less successfully implemented the view and controller ideology = of an MVC framework in WebDNA, and am getting ever closer to doing the = work to get data models working in webDNA. It=E2=80=99s so frustrating = in 2016 to not be able to tag a field in a database as unique or numeric = and let the language deal with it for you when you interact with the = database. I recently wasted more time then I care to admit to making = [delete db=3Dsomedb&leIDdata=3D10000] work because i forgot to add = &IDtype=3Dnum to the code. >=20 >=20 >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------- > 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 .
Brian Burton
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:
WebCommerce: Folder organization ? (1997)
multiple search of same field (1999)
Replace Statement (1997)
Variable prices and Formulas.db (1997)
Server crash (1997)
WebCat Hosting (1998)
OT Spell Check (2003)
Location of Browser Info.txt file (1997)
Sorting Numbers (1997)
Bug alert! (1997)
Problems appending to database (1997)
[delete] problem (1997)
PageMaker/Quark to db (1999)
Maybe off topic but how to charge (1997)
[WebDNA] WebDNA hosting (2012)
WebCat2_Mac RETURNs in .db (1997)
WC2.0 Memory Requirements (1997)
frames & carts (1997)
Emailer setup (1997)
[WebDNA] Dan's WSC status request (2014)