From: Maciej Sobczak (prog_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-12-06 02:58:42
Nicola Musatti wrote:
> As I already mentioned in a previous discussion I believe that a distinction
> should be introduced between core DB access functionality and higher
> abstractions such as the object/relational mapping, especially in view of a
> possible standard submission.
Yes, the SOCI library has this layered structure:
> Diagnostics is another area that deserves consideration. In a way failures are
> easy to handle, because you can always, or rather should always, throw
> exceptions. On the other hand I don't think there's a proven best way for
> providing non terminating, informative diagnostics.
That's right, this subject is scary.
Just consider the fact that some servers do not have numbered error
codes (that would be straightforward to map), just strings.
Add to this another fact that the server can be "i18ned" and the
language of the error message can be chosen by a the admin at the server
> Is it possible to devise a
> unified approach that combines general backend information to details on data
> retrieval results (eg. nulls, truncation, etc.)?. This is directly connected to
> value representation issues, like the use of Boost.Optional to represent nulls,
I think that the indicators in SOCI provide this unified approach.
-- Maciej Sobczak : http://www.msobczak.com/ Programming : http://www.msobczak.com/prog/
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk