From: Austin Bingham (abingham_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-12-07 17:21:20
>>> Boost.Database seems exactly right to me.
> Unfortunately there's already an abandoned Boost.Database in the sandbox -- so
> that might be confusing.
They appear, however, to do exactly the same thing. That is, if one is
accepted, the other will be rightly dumped. Since one is abandoned and
the other very much alive, I think the concern over potential confusion
>> It's an improvement on SOCI or DAL, but it doesn't quite work for me.
>> I can imagine thinking that this might be a database library more like
>> Sleepycat or cdb rather than an interface to backend databases.
> How about database access abbreviated to dba -- hmm that kinda has a nice ring :-)
>> What about BDBC - Boost Database Connectivity? (Which intentionally mirrors ODBC...)
>> The mascot can be Twiki from Buck Rogers. :) BDBDBDBDBDB...C
> I'm sorry to say that I got this joke. But really BDBC is an awful mouthful.
> ..dbc might be ok.
Whatever we pick, I think we should avoid any name that isn't pretty
immediately clear on a quick scan. With a few exceptions (i.e. Spirit),
you can quickly tell what a boost library does based solely on it's name.
So, while "database" gives a pretty good clue as to the library's purpose,
"bdbc" or "dba" are less informative. As the list of boost libraries
grows, I think it behooves us to avoid obfuscation and, thus, confusion.
-- Austin Bingham Signal & Information Sciences Laboratory Applied Research Laboratories, University of Texas at Austin 10000 Burnet Rd., Austin, TX 78758
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk