I actually took a lot of inspiration from sqlx, which is really nice. The main differences are:
- in JS/TS you don't have compile-time scripts that you can run like with Rust's macros, so you need to run a codegen command before running the type checks (disadvantage)
- I had to create a TS parser that goes and finds the tagged template functions with the sql statements, while sqlx has them "for free" because sql statements are the input to the macro itself (disadvantage)
- I use an in-memory Postgres (PGLite) to describe the queries, instead of requiring a running pg instance (advantage)
- I don't cache the statements and codegen for now like sqlx does, something that can be added later
I think they are similar in that they both substitute the dynamic params with no-ops like $1, $2, etc. before handing the sql statement to the pg's DESCRIBE function
alt Hacker News
I actually took a lot of inspiration from sqlx, which is really nice. The main differences are:
- in JS/TS you don't have compile-time scripts that you can run like with Rust's macros, so you need to run a codegen command before running the type checks (disadvantage)
- I had to create a TS parser that goes and finds the tagged template functions with the sql statements, while sqlx has them "for free" because sql statements are the input to the macro itself (disadvantage)
- I use an in-memory Postgres (PGLite) to describe the queries, instead of requiring a running pg instance (advantage)
- I don't cache the statements and codegen for now like sqlx does, something that can be added later
I think they are similar in that they both substitute the dynamic params with no-ops like $1, $2, etc. before handing the sql statement to the pg's DESCRIBE function