15.07.2014 15:23, Tony Whyman wrote:
The criticism of the old API in the release notes appears valid
This criticism is valid not for API itself, but mostly for its internal
implementation.
API is fine, code under the hood is inadequate.
Most of 16 bits limitation belongs to the Message
16.07.2014 12:15, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
This criticism is valid not for API itself, but mostly for its internal
implementation.
API is fine, code under the hood is inadequate.
Once again, you don't count the message based API being a public API.
Most of 16 bits limitation belongs to
16.07.2014 11:49, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
Once again, you don't count the message based API being a public API.
Right. I always say that messages API is an ancient cram which nobody can
use and stay
sane.
It's no longer used by the DSQL API, but it's still used directly by at
least GBAK
There appears to be an impass: The desire to define an interface in C++
and the problems of cross compiler and cross language access to the API.
Here are some thoughts.
First, defining an API as an abstact object interface is the correct
approach. The original 30 year old interface took
I agree with Jim is probably the easiest way to respond to this. I have
no interested in shooting down the C++ API - I just want to ensure that
Firebird continues to be accessible from other languages and a handle
based API is the easiest lowest common denominator.
I would just add that C++ is
15.07.2014 15:08, Tony Whyman wrote:
I agree with Jim is probably the easiest way to respond to this. I have no
interested in
shooting down the C++ API - I just want to ensure that Firebird continues to
be accessible
from other languages and a handle based API is the easiest lowest common
Dimitry,
If Firebird is to continue to have a handle based API then your options are:
1. Upgrade the existing handle based API
2. Create 'C' wrapper functions for each virtual method call in the new API.
The criticism of the old API in the release notes appears valid and so
the easiest and
On Tue, 15 Jul 2014 15:49:05 +0200, Dimitry Sibiryakov s...@ibphoenix.com
wrote:
15.07.2014 15:41, Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
This one is surely a phantom:
Sure it is. It even refuses to open (leave alone absence of links
from
official www
server).
15.07.2014 16:00, Mark Rotteveel wrote:
http://www.firebirdsql.org/en/news/firebird-3-0-alpha-2-release-is-available-for-testing-38022/
There.
Fne, just fiine:
Not Found
The requested URL
/download/prerelease/rlsnotes/Firebird-3.0.0_Alpha2-ReleaseNotes.pdf was not
found on this
15.07.2014 17:49, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
It even refuses to open (leave alone absence of links from official www
server).
Surprise, but the link is from the official www server.
Dmitry
--
Want fast and easy
On Tuesday 15 July 2014 15:41:59 Dmitry Yemanov wrote:
15.07.2014 17:29, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote:
The criticism of the old API in the release notes appears valid
There is no release notes yet
This one is surely a phantom:
Something a very clever fellow might do would be to create and populate a
database capturing the interface then write an (extensible) program to
generate interface variants. It could, for example, produce the pure
virtual interface, the skeleton of the implementation classes, the flat
language
Paul Reeves [2014-07-15 16:11] :
but all but one of the folders underneath seem to be inaccessible
:-(
Seems all accessible now
--
Want fast and easy access to all the code in your enterprise? Index and
search up to
13 matches
Mail list logo
