[R-sig-DB] Re: Rdbi package [forwarded msg]

[Timothy H. Keitt]

David James wrote:

> Timothy H. Keitt wrote:
> 
>>I haven't had time to fix up the data conversion stuff. I have some old 
>>routines from RPgSQL in Rdbi.PgSQL. The choice is to leave the 
>>conversion behavior undefined and let each specific implementation 
>>handle conversion however they see fit, or to define a set of generic 
>>functions to be subclassed. The latter is preferable, but probably 
>>difficult to get right given the heterogeneity among potential data 
>>sources. (Or more accurately, I mean that its difficult to do cleanly; 
>>if you cover all the marginal cases, it will get unwieldy.)
>>
> 
> No need to do this, for the time being.  If I'm not mistaken, we're 
> taking the Rdbi package to be a starting point for a common interface, 
> so by necessity it will have to evolve as we gain experience with it
> and its various driver implementations.  


Agreed.

> 
> I still think that we need a document (in English, that is) to describe 
> the interface, its classes and generic functions, perhaps the various data 
> conversion mechanisms, ways to query the metadata, and so forth
> e.g., what to do with SQL keywords in R/S objects that we export to DBMS.
> Also, it is in this kind of document were we could identify core and optional
> features.  (Both the python and perl interfaces have such a 
> specification document.)


Agreed, also, but its not likely I will be able to do this anytime soon.

T.

> 
> 
>>Tim
>>
>>David James wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Kurt Hornik wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>>>>M Edward Borasky writes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>Sounds good to me. At some point in the near future I may get a chance
>>>>>to test it on a Windows box with MS Access; I've been using RODBC for
>>>>>that.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>Ok.  Will wait till tomorrow morning to allow for further reactions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>Not that I anticipate any major issues, but could we wait until the end
>>>of this week?  I'd like to check a couple of things (one that Torsten
>>>brought to my attention last week and has to do with data conversions,
>>>and portability to Splus being the other).
>>>
>>
>>I'm not running Splus, so I haven't tried to make it compatible. It 
>>would seem to be a good thing to do, although I admit, I've been pretty 
>>unhappy with Mathsoft in the past because of their callous attitude 
>>towards UNIX, which (as far as I know) is the environment where S 
>>originated.
>>
> 
> I understand, and I wouldn't expect people to be doing both R and 
> S implementations.  All I'm suggesting is to see if we could follow 
> some simple guidelines to make it easier for other people to port 
> from one system to the other.  My guess is that it'll be users and/or
> some of us --not Insightful-- doing the porting.
> 
> 
>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Best,
>>>>-k
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>>>>From: r-sig-db-admin using stat.math.ethz.ch
>>>>>>[mailto:r-sig-db-admin using stat.math.ethz.ch]On Behalf Of Kurt Hornik
>>>>>>Sent: Sunday, September 30, 2001 2:58 AM
>>>>>>To: Kurt.Hornik using ci.tuwien.ac.at
>>>>>>Cc: David James; R-SIG-DB using stat.math.ethz.ch; Timothy H. Keitt; Saikat
>>>>>>DebRoy; Torsten Hothorn
>>>>>>Subject: [R-sig-DB] Re: Rdbi package [forwarded msg]
>>>>>>I have not seen any followup on this for almost a month.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Hence, I assume that everyone is happy with the new design, and suggest
>>>>>>to move Tim's package from contrib/Devel to contrib.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>-k
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>
>>-- 
>>Timothy H. Keitt
>>Department of Ecology and Evolution
>>State University of New York at Stony Brook
>>Stony Brook, New York 11794 USA
>>Phone: 631-632-1101, FAX: 631-632-7626
>>http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/ee/keitt/
>>
>>
> 


-- 
Timothy H. Keitt
Department of Ecology and Evolution
State University of New York at Stony Brook
Stony Brook, New York 11794 USA
Phone: 631-632-1101, FAX: 631-632-7626
http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/ee/keitt/