On Tue, 2008-12-23 at 11:55 +0100, Vivien Malerba wrote: > > I much prefer explict API such as set_table_name(), > > add_field_to_table(), and change_table_definition(). > > > The problem with explicit API is that you end up with a very long list > of > symbols, especially if one wants to include every database's > specificities, > considering not only tables operations but all sorts of operations (on > indexes, triggers, stored procedures,...) which are not yet > implemented.
I don't personally see a problem with this. You can put it in a separate shared library if you are worried about library loading times. > A solution will probably be to include API for common operations such > as the > ones you mention, and then still have a generic API (the existing one) > for > database's specificities. That would be a great start. Thanks. > Anyway, this is for post V4. OK. -- [email protected] www.murrayc.com www.openismus.com _______________________________________________ gnome-db-list mailing list [email protected] http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-db-list
