Re: Type BOOLEAN

Edi Weitz wrote:
> Oops, I didn't expect it to be that complicated, I mostly use
> PostgreSQL. Yes, if I were to decide I'd be happy if
> GENERALIZED-BOOLEAN were treated like BOOLEAN is treated now. I
> usually like it if the data Lisp writes to the SQL database is
> accessible by other languages without the need for complicated
> translations.

Okay. PostgreSQL (through ODBC) is one of the tricky boolean
translations. Though the direct postgresql API returns 'f' or 't' for
boolean slots, the psqlodbc driver returns '0' or '1'.

>From sql/generic-odbc.lisp:.

(defmethod read-sql-value (val (type (eql 'boolean))
                           (database generic-odbc-database)
                           (db-type (eql :postgresql)))
  (if (string= "0" val) nil t))
 
   
I'll go ahead and add the generalized-boolean type. This addition does
seem to beg for subclassing on the type specifier. But, I don't think
the code should be refactored just for this one duplicate type which
duplicates the read/write behavior of a different type.

-- 
Kevin Rosenberg
kevin-HJRc7zDS/[email protected]