Hi Chris, these are good questions -- actually, you might have mentioned Takusen, too. Clearly, HDBC is the largest of these projects, and there are lots of things well done there. Takusen has an interesting approach, and I would like to see a discussion here about the practical outcomes, as I have done no testing yet. I myself quite a time ago had an opportunity to do a Haskell job with a PostgreSQL backend for a client, where I tried out all three and got hsql running easiest. A maintainer was vacant, so I stepped in happily -- doing refactorings, fixing problems at request, giving advice to people. I can say that I am quite a little PostgreSQL centric and that I have a GIS project in sight, for which I want to try to adapt hsql. Cheers, Nick Christopher Done wrote:
One thing that would be nice is a unification of the general database libraries hsql and HDBC. What is the difference between them? Why are there two, and why are there sets of drivers for both (duplication of effort?)? I've used both in the past but I can't discern a real big difference (I used the hsql-sqlite library and the HDBC-postgresql library, whichever worked...). It seems the best thing to do is either actively merge them together and encourage the community to move from one to the other -- judging from what I've read HDBC is more up to date and newer than hsql -- or have some documentation with damn good reasons to choose one or the other, because currently this is a needless source of confusion and possible duplication of effort for Haskell's database libraries.
I wasn't going to post until I'd actually researched the difference myself properly but I didn't get chance to have a look over the weekend, but I thought I'd pose the question. Do people actually care about this? _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe