On Wed, Oct 31, 2012 at 10:46 PM, cowwoc <cowwoc_at_bbs.darktech.org> wrote:
> Tatu,
>
> I feel much better about it now that you clarified that optional pieces
> don't incur any overhead. Regarding jDBI, I wish they'd use QueryDSL-sql
> instead. I'm addicted to compile-time safety for SQL expressions. It's not
Interesting, thank you for reference. Sounds like an interesting project.
Good luck!
-+ Tatu +-