Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
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.
|
