Timeline for Why aren't databases integrated as a language feature?
Current License: CC BY-SA 2.5
30 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 17, 2018 at 1:21 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackSoftEng/status/953436965470425088 | ||
| Jan 11, 2018 at 14:08 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jan 16, 2018 at 3:03 | |||||
| Jan 11, 2018 at 13:51 | history | protected | gnat | ||
| Jan 5, 2015 at 14:28 | comment | added | Mawg | Why not just statically link Sqlite for those apps which need it, and not burden the language/compiler for those that don't? | |
| Nov 8, 2013 at 21:40 | comment | added | Michael O'Neill | @Job "You should not lock into a particular database" As generally as it is stated, I couldn't disagree more with that idea in general. Rather, I'd refine that philosophy or stop espousing it. For instance, I would not lock my UI layer code into a particular database. However, I would most definitely lock my services layer code into a particular database. | |
| Oct 7, 2013 at 16:59 | comment | added | user16764 | COBOL is more or less a flat-file-database language. Does it count? | |
| Jul 1, 2012 at 9:11 | comment | added | SK-logic | Prolog has a database as a language feature. Datalog has a database as the only language feature. | |
| Jul 1, 2012 at 2:24 | answer | added | mamcx | timeline score: 0 | |
| Dec 30, 2011 at 12:37 | comment | added | gbjbaanb | and unfortunately, Linq2EF has some nasty microsoft-only extensions, which means you get locked into SQLServer with it if you do anything complex. | |
| Aug 9, 2011 at 3:31 | vote | accept | VirtuosiMedia | ||
| Aug 9, 2011 at 3:30 | vote | accept | VirtuosiMedia | ||
| Aug 9, 2011 at 3:30 | |||||
| S Feb 25, 2011 at 12:34 | answer | added | jwenting | timeline score: 0 | |
| S Feb 25, 2011 at 12:34 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki | ||
| Feb 25, 2011 at 12:28 | answer | added | user1249 | timeline score: 2 | |
| Feb 25, 2011 at 12:09 | answer | added | Rei Miyasaka | timeline score: 2 | |
| Dec 16, 2010 at 0:19 | answer | added | user10202 | timeline score: 0 | |
| Dec 13, 2010 at 21:52 | comment | added | Lukas Eder | Linq is awesome. If you're doing Java, however, try jooq.sourceforge.net | |
| Dec 8, 2010 at 12:30 | answer | added | John Christensen | timeline score: 4 | |
| Dec 8, 2010 at 12:24 | comment | added | Jon Hopkins | Possibly related: programmers.stackexchange.com/questions/16779/… | |
| Dec 8, 2010 at 12:11 | answer | added | user131 | timeline score: 0 | |
| Dec 7, 2010 at 20:08 | comment | added | BlackICE | linq2SQL is dead, replaced by linq2EF, but same principle | |
| Dec 3, 2010 at 18:06 | comment | added | Job | .NET has LINQ for SQL, which I think is the right approach to a general problem. You should not lock into a particular database, and you cannot make something that is general enough, and yet implement every feature of everything that is out there. LINQ is still awesome, just as I am. | |
| Dec 3, 2010 at 14:32 | answer | added | Steven A. Lowe | timeline score: 2 | |
| Dec 3, 2010 at 8:43 | comment | added | Kevin Cantu | I thought SQL was a language. :D | |
| Dec 3, 2010 at 8:34 | answer | added | user281377 | timeline score: 29 | |
| Dec 3, 2010 at 6:29 | answer | added | Tangurena | timeline score: 16 | |
| Dec 3, 2010 at 6:00 | answer | added | vpit3833 | timeline score: 4 | |
| Dec 3, 2010 at 5:58 | answer | added | sal | timeline score: 14 | |
| Dec 3, 2010 at 5:58 | answer | added | Jason Baker | timeline score: 16 | |
| Dec 3, 2010 at 5:47 | history | asked | VirtuosiMedia | CC BY-SA 2.5 |