[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Ken,
Ken North wrote:
>If we pass strings between XQJ clients and XQuery servers, developers who've
>been processing SQL using C++, PHP, Perl, and Python will often choose to
>support XQuery by adapting existing scripts or classes.
>
>
>
What do you mean by XQJ client ? Is it the driver, which implements the
XQJ API, takes the queries and sends them off to the server ?
Or do you mean the code written by the XQJ user ?
I think the user should be able to choose what to pass to the XQJ driver
(or client) - be it strings for compatibility, or trees for sanity reasons.
The driver can then do fancy things in its executeUpdate or executeQuery
implementation which should not be of concern to the user.
>On the other hand, if an XQJ client must emit abstract syntax trees (serialized
>as Java byte arrays), we'll have to write Java programs for both ends of the XQJ
>client - XQuery server link.
>
>
>
But that is an implementation choice that is well beyond the scope of
the XQJ spec, isn't it ?
I am not sure whether one would always choose to transmit the AST,
because drivers may choose to create something more low-lever than that
(s.th. closer to "execution plans"). But I am sure that what ever you
want to transmit, you can generate it nicely from the AST.
Any Java byte arrays can be "serialized" to a sequence of bytes (just
don't call the "serialize" method, but write something like
"toMyCustomBLOB()").
cheers,
B.
|
