Show HN: NoSQL, but it's SQLite

The implementation is very clearly included, if you... scrolled down.

And the point is, you could easy do `const db = new Database("./database.sqlite")` instead.

The wrapper makes it so manipulating your database is just like manipulating a plain Javascript object.

Yes that is exactly what it is! It's basically a very small upgrade over my favorite database: A JSON-file :)

I'm using something like this for a small personal project that's only going to have a couple of users. Basically, just an app for myself and my girlfriend for all of the various restaurants, movies, recipes, tv shows, locations, etc. that we plan to go to/do at some point in the future. It's basically just a glorified todo list that uses APIs (TheMovieDataBase, OpenStreetMap, etc.) to grab additional metadata and images to present everything nicely

I want us both to be able to make notes/add ratings to each item, so the set of tables looks like this:

    - TodoItems
    - Notes
    - Ratings

    CREATE TABLE TodoItems (
      id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY NOT NULL,
      kind TEXT NOT NULL,
      metadata BLOB NOT NULL
    );

Postgres added native support for JSON in 2012. People have been using RDBMS to store denormalized data and even as a key-value store for way longer than that. In fact, it's very hard not to do that

Not sure what your exact use case is, I'm curious actually, but storing JSON strings should work much better. JSON functions are supported since SQL Server 2016 [0]. This is how I do it atm. I store only indexible content in table columns and everything else goes into an `attributes` JSON column. MSSQL supports indexes even on JSON fields, but I have not tried that, yet.

0 - https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/sql/relational-databases/j...

This needs some explanation

Submitted it to The Daily WTF yet?

[dead]

[flagged]

Maybe because it’s written with a LLM

Users flagged it. We can only guess why users flag things, but there are usually clues in the comments. I've turned the flags off now.

p.s. @dang doesn't work - you have to email hn@ycombinator.com if you want mostly-guaranteed message delivery.

I'd be a little less reflexively hostile if the prompting used to generate it was prominently included, so that it was at least possible to see which properties of the output were deliberately asked for.

When I read a piece of code I don't understand, ideally I'm able to assume that the author intended what was written, and learn something when I figure out why. With AI generated code, I can't do that: the original author is more or less destroyed once the context is gone; at best I can ask someone who was kinda-sorta around when the author wrote it (i.e. the person who prompted it). At worst I'm really just asking someone (or something) else to guess what was intended.

Even granting that the generated code is implementing a coherent design (and that's a big if!), what we're left with is a very quick way to generate legacy code who's author is no longer around to answer questions. Such legacy code, if it's been proven to work, I might just stick a “don't touch this” sign on it, but if it starts causing any problems, I'd end up doing a ground-up rewrite if only to (potentially) understand what problems and concerns influenced the design to make it what it is.

AI can certainly be useful for this later task, but it'd be far preferable to just start there, as a form of pair-programming. And at that point, I doubt it'd be so interesting to say “built with ‹whatever model is popular today›” in the title.

Seems to mean "negative-acknowledgement" if like me you've never seen this abbreviation used before.

And yeah I agree.

100% ;)