Re: [boost] database library (was Report from Berlin C++ Standards Committee meeting)

From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-15 18:42:01

On Sun, 16 Apr 2006 00:38:57 +0300, Yuval Ronen wrote
> Jeff Garland wrote:
> > I'd still really like to see a database binding library make it into 
> > TR2.  Not having this is killing C++ against Java for application 
> > developers.  We've had some periodic fits and starts, but it seems clear 
> > we won't have a Boost library by then.  I'd still like to see someone 
> > with some time step up and take this on.  It's been done about 10 times 
> > so I think a proposal could be gleaned from the best of the current 
> > bindings...
> 
> All this database talks made me a bit puzzled. What's exactly the 
> standard committee can do about database interface? I mean, does 
> specifying a standard interface for database means that I can write 
> code that uses this interface and then I'll find my self reading 
> data from a database? 

Yes.

> Which database? 

Any relational database.

> The database compiler vendors 
> will suddenly have to provide with their compiler to satisfy the 
> standard requirements? Probably not... Compiler vendors won't start 
> writing databases (except Microsoft, of course :-) ). This means 
> that this standard interface would be directed to database vendors 
> rather than compiler vendors. Is this the plan? That database 
> vendors will start supplying C++ header files and lib files with a 
> "C++ Compliant" stamp?

You raise a good point. Virtually all database vendors supply an ODBC
interface -- so I would expect that this would be the primary basic 'driver
interface' supplied by companies building standard libraries.  However, I
would expect the architecture to allow for database or standard library
vendors to provide high performance native bindings for particular databases.  

Jeff