Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> The psuedocode in question happens to be syntactically valid Ruby.

So is everything else anyone types, code-like or not. He even said "Note how I deliberately shuffled the order and didn't bother with escaping.".

The response was flippant, intelligence-insulting, and obviously the result of failing to read thoroughly.

And speaking of intelligence-insulting, we all know you can run raw SQL through Sequel.

You're not having a useful dialogue, you're being combative, like the person I initially replied to.

I said the code snippet looked like raw interpolation to me, and I asked how it could be made not vulnerable to injection. It was an honest observation and a genuine question. No flippancy was involved. You're free to think I'm an idiot, but you are the one being insulting and combative here.

As everyone has repeatedly pointed out, once you deal with the obvious issues you quickly end up with something that looks like the gazillions of other ORMs on the market; sorry if I hurt anyone's feelings.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact