From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-12-05 13:24:44
Maciej Sobczak wrote:
> Jeff Garland wrote:
>>> The more difficult part is the library interface and its general philosophy.
>> Not sure I understand the problem here...
> The SOCI library stands out a bit in the crowd thanks to its basic
> interfacing assumptions. Some users love it exactly because of its
> interface and some others hate it exactly for the same reason.
> This already proved to be a recipe for heat generator. ;-)
In general, providing two different interfaces to do the same thing is
considered poor software design. But if divergent use case needs,
performance, or other important considerations are present, having two
different interfaces may be viewed as a real plus. Witness asio's
synchronous and asynchronous interfaces. Viewed from a distance, they
seem like duplication. But as you get closer, you see that they offer
such a different set of design tradeoffs that both are merited. I don't
know if that applies to SOCI.
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk