Duncan Temple Lang writes:
I had raised this with Tim. One could argue for `SDBI' a la Omegahat
but I do not think the `S' is necessary.
I will wait with moving up the packages until the naming has been
deciced.
Given the connection between R and Perl, Python & Java, it is entirely
possible that we will implement a version of the `DBI' interface using
Perl DBI, Python DBI or JDBC. (Saikat, David and I did this using Java
for the RSDBI interface.) In that case, the ambiguity of talking
about DBI in the S and Perl worlds may warrant having an S prefixing
the package name. In other words, we do want to think globally and
not assume that we are working entirely in the S world.
Hmm. Good point. My reading of David et al's DBI proposal is that of
an abstract interface with drivers for the various RDBMs, which would
give the `native' S DBI. Of course, as we can access Perl and friends
there could be more DBIs available to S users. Hence, we should perhaps
go for `SDBI' or `SDBC' ...