Hi,
I notice that most of this thread is going in the direction of trying to replicate SQL syntax instead of doing something closer to normal logic.
Hence the name SQL.
From boost::sql i would expect ecactly that: A library that lets me use SQL in a portable way.
I'd be much happier to use a syntax that just specifies "what I want" rather than "how to get there." In some cases the library could be responsible for conjuring up JOINs, for example, when that's the most efficient approach.
Such a library would hide SQL as an implementation detail. It could provide SQL-less backends just as well. In that case SQL wouldn't be an appropriate name, Let's call it RDB instead. An RDB library surely would make a lot of us happier than an SQL library. But this doesn't render an SQL library useless. I fact, it surely would be of use for the RDB library. Cheers, Daniel