I think you have a good point, and I think that what we can shoot for is
over time targetting having the same canons for embedded and network client.
Of course, if we took the original intent of the 'am' (Abstract Machine)
package and put it on top of both the embedded and network code, then a
lot of this would be taken care of forthwith. But that is easier said
than done :)
David
Oystein Grovlen - Sun Norway wrote:
David W. Van Couvering wrote:
I am also realizing that we as a community need to decide if we want
to ensure that the network client and the engine should always have
the same SQL States for the same exceptions. It's laudable, and if
we catch differences I think we should fix them, but I am not sure if
it should be *required*, especially for existing code. It is *very*
hard to reliably backport this consistency into existing code, as the
code paths on the two drivers are quite different. If anyone has any
ideas about this, it would be much appreciated.
This s a requirement if one want be able to run a test both in embedded
and client/server mode with the same canon. Maybe that approach,
running tests in both frameworks and compare, could be used to detect
differences between client and embedded. Maybe existing canon can give
hints to where there is a difference.
