From: Jeff Garland (jeff_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-04-17 11:13:16
On Sun, 16 Apr 2006 22:33:54 -0400, Beman Dawes wrote
> "Steve Hutton" <shutton_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
> > - SQL is an ANSI standard, and it is universally known by every db
> > developer
> > and database administrator. It is taught in schools and entire books
> > are written about it.
> SQL is also an ISO standard. That is very imporant from the
> standpoint of the C++ committee. C++ is an ISO standard, so it can
> easily reference other ISO standards. For SQL, that means that the
> C++ Standard doesn't have to specify how SQL works - instead it just
> says "see ISO standard such-and-such". That keeps the LWG, the
> project editor, and utilimately the gnomes of Geneva all happy.
The problem (of course there has to be a problem), is that all the databases
have various extensions to the SQL standard. And as far as I understand
pretty much all stored procedures are non-portable -- which is enough for me
to aviod them. In any case, I don't think we want the library to preclude
allowing the use of non-standard extensions in the case that the user is
comfortable with the non-portability between databases. So I'm not sure if
all this helps or hurts...
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk