On 22 May 2003 at 15:19, Robert (Jamie) Munro wrote:

> Has anyone considered expanding the dialect system to allow firebird to
> emulate other database's dialects. I would propose that instead of 1,2,3 we
> have named plug-in dialects that exist in DLL files or something, like UDFs.

The sole purpose of SQL dialects in IB 6 was to separate changes and new
features at various levels that were not backward compatible with older
versions, and to allow **user controlled** transition of databases and
applications to new format. It was supposed that NEW databases and
applications would always use dialect 3.

It's not only about differences in SQL statements, but mainly about
different meaning of various core things (like object identificators,
DATE datatype differences etc.). Actually, it's a hack and a nightmare,
and IMHO we should get rid of dialects in (distant enough) future when no
one would migrate pre-v6 IB db & apps to latest Firebird version.

> Dialects could include:
>
> * sqlstandard - the most standards compliant we can make it
> * firebird - the built in Firebird dialect, with extensions to the standards
> based on the capabilities of the engine
> * interbase - to keep compatible with new versions of interbase from Borland
> * interbaseclassic - the current dialect 1
> * msaccess - not case sensitive, put table and field names in [], put
> strings in "" etc.
> * mysql
> * posgresql
> * oracle
> * db2
> * sybase
> etc.

Skinnable language for the engine ? :-) Why not, but not as "true" SQL
dialects please. It's possible to develop and provide WHATEVER language
to BLR compiler from (I guess) day one. Right now, you can use SQL
(Firebird version) and GDML languages.

Best regards
Pavel Cisar

See you at the First European Firebird Conference in May in Fulda,
Germany
http://www.firebird-conference.com

http://www.ibphoenix.com
For all your upto date Firebird and
InterBase information