Re: [SQLObject] Re: Impressions so far

[Ian B. <ia...@co...>]

On Sat, 2003-05-31 at 23:36, Edmund Lian wrote:
> > Yep. Big problem holding this back is that any current implementation of a
> > BooleanCol doesn't work in Postgres, because saying "obj.boolCol = True" fails
> > during SQL conversion, since PG won't accept integer literals for boolean
> > values. Grr.. (I'm a happy PG user, but this always bothers me...)
> 
> Do a behind-the-scenes conversion to the strings "1" and "0" or "t" and 
> "f". This way, boolean support in DBs that don't have booleans (e.g., 
> Oracle) is easier.

Yes, I'd want to be able to do conversion based on the backend.  Like
ENUM is simulated, BOOL should be simulated too.

I guess I'll have to keep in mind that the validation/conversion has to
be potentially database-specific.

  Ian