[Dbix-class] Explicit ASTs (ping nate)

[Matt S Trout]

Sam Vilain wrote:
> David E. Wheeler wrote:
>>>  From my experience with working on Set::Relation and the Rosetta DBMS
>>> (and the now defunct SQL::Routine), if you *really* want to have an
>>> explicit AST that says exactly what you mean, is expressive enough
>>> for 99+% of any real-world uses, and is very portable, you
>>> essentially have to define a whole turing complete language,
>>> including the basics (which is what I am doing).
>> I think that's true if you want to write an RDBMS. But we're just  
>> trying to support SELECT statements, here.
> 
> We can do both, if you allow a "function call" and "function
> application" to be the basic operations of your language.  Works for lisp.

Which is rather what I'm trying to move the syntax towards, so we can use a 
heavily functional approach in the generation stages and macro-like things to 
do comprehensions across the explicit AST.

-- 
      Matt S Trout       Offering custom development, consultancy and support
   Technical Director    contracts for Catalyst, DBIx::Class and BAST. Contact
Shadowcat Systems Ltd.  mst (at) shadowcatsystems.co.uk for more information

+ Help us build a better perl ORM: http://dbix-class.shadowcatsystems.co.uk/ +