From: Steve Hutton (shutton_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-10-05 11:33:24
On 2006-10-05, Nicola Musatti <Nicola.Musatti_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Just to make this clear: I have absolutely nothing against a boostified version
> of SOCI being accepted into Boost and eventually submitted to the Committee for
> inclusion in a future TR or directly into the Standard.
> However I am concerned about the suitability of some of the interface choices
> made by the SOCI developers. I started writing my own library because I felt
> that my arguments would carry more weight with a concrete implementation to
> support them, however experimental, and because starting from scratch with Boost
> compliance in mind was simpler than attempting a partial boostification of the
> SOCI code base.
Thanks for doing this - personally I welcome the discussion of these
interface details, and I am open to considering the issues you are
raising. I've never thought that a boostified version of SOCI would
go through with exactly the interface it has today. There might be
a scenario in which standalone SOCI lives on alongside its decendent
boost.SQL, with a slightly different interface. However, we need
to get Maciej's thoughts on these issues when he comes back online.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk