Hi,
One key thing missing from N3612 is object relational mapping. It is not
appropriate in all cases but it does make working
with databases so much more convenient. Low level access should be possible
(though sometimes I question this) but not required.
Regards,
Bruce.
>________________________________
> From: Sergei Nikulov <[email protected]>
>To: SOCI general discussion list <[email protected]>
>Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 3:34 PM
>Subject: Re: [soci-users] The next three big things
>
>
>
>
>2013/3/28 Mateusz Loskot <[email protected]>
>
>Hi,
>>
>>There has been interesting discussions about integer support
>>and new tests lately and I'll follow up in relevant threads in details soon.
>>There is also lots of ideas and brainstorming about future plans:
>>
>>https://github.com/SOCI/soci/wiki/Roadmap
>>
>>There are three big things that will either require substantial
>>amount of work or will introduce major changes:
>>
>>1. Buried headers - major structural change
>>Perhaps it is good chance to
>>- rename headers .h to .hpp,
>>- introduce backend specific namespaces (see Roadmap)
>>- clean up the repo tree a bit, evict www to separate repository
>>- ???
>>
>>2. New tests
>>
>>3. C++ integer types support
>>
>>Do we all agree to release those features in SOCI 4?
>>
>>Initially, having SVN experiences in mind, I thought it's
>>important to do the buried headers and all structural
>>changes first.
>>Is my concern justified, shall we do the revolution first?
>>
>>OTOH, it's Git, so we branching is effortless (tm).
>>We can branch off of develop and start working on
>>each of them in parallel.
>>Does anyone see any problem with that?
>>
>>The branches will be most likely long-running
>>branches, so I'd like to publish them in SOCI/soci repo,
>>i.e.
>>feature/buried-headers
>>feature/new-tests
>>feature/cpp-integer
>>Then, everyone will be able to contribute with pull requests
>>against those branches, review, the code, etc.
>>
>>Any comments on how we should proceed?
>>
>>
>>p.s. It looks, development discussions wiggle between soci-users
>>and soci-devel. I personally have no problem with use either or both.
>>But, if there are subscribers on soci-users list who do not wish to receive
>>posts related to development process, speak up please.
>>Then I'll ask to move such talks to soci-devel completely.
>>
>>Best regards,
>>--
>>Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
>>
>>
>
>Here the database interface proposal http://isocpp.org/files/papers/n3612.pdf
>
>I think we can pick something from this paper.
>
>
>--
>Best Regards,
>Sergei Nikulov
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Own the Future-Intel® Level Up Game Demo Contest 2013
>Rise to greatness in Intel's independent game demo contest.
>Compete for recognition, cash, and the chance to get your game
>on Steam. $5K grand prize plus 10 genre and skill prizes.
>Submit your demo by 6/6/13. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel_levelupd2d
>_______________________________________________
>soci-users mailing list
>[email protected]
>https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/soci-users
>
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Own the Future-Intel(R) Level Up Game Demo Contest 2013
Rise to greatness in Intel's independent game demo contest. Compete
for recognition, cash, and the chance to get your game on Steam.
$5K grand prize plus 10 genre and skill prizes. Submit your demo
by 6/6/13. http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/12124-176961-30367-2
_______________________________________________
soci-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/soci-users
