From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-03-15 08:55:14
Thorsten Ottosen wrote:
> Maciej Sobczak wrote:
>> Jeff Garland wrote:
>>> Well, I'll be brutally honest -- I don't think I would go that
>>> direction. We didn't pick a database project last year because a
>>> majority of the mentors agreed that the 'dsl-based' approach was more of
>>> a toy than reality. The main reason for this is that in 'real-world'
>>> applications queries are often dynamic and must be built at run-time.
>> The other reason is that in 'real-world' you might want to call stored
>> procedures instead of manually glued pieces of ad-hoc SQL queries, in
>> which case the support in the area of query composition is probably not
>> very useful anyway.
> In the 'real-world' both things are used.
> Choosing C++ for a projects where databases are involved is probably
> rare and Java/C#/Python/Ruby is more likely. C++ doesn't exactly
Wow, I couldn't disagree more. Thousands of projects use C++ for database
access. And even now, there are projects for which a tightly written db
access core in C++ performs better than scripted or Java equivalent. Now I'll
be the first to admit the lack of good modern libraries and tools for C++
database mapping doesn't make C++ the first choice -- in fact it hinders the
adoption of C++ greatly. But if your application is already in C++ you really
shouldn't be 'punished' by not having good db access tools and libraries.
> boost productivity, so it has to offer something else to be a condidate.
> And what can C++ offer? Type safety.
Raw, unadulterated speed.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, david.abrahams at rcn.com, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk