Hi, > IMO there are some problems with the dbx extension: > > - it is a wrapper for PHP modules instead for the underlying > database API (therefore slower)
True, but this makes for a lot less build-headaches: dbx has no build-dependencies > - you cannot rely on it if you depend on an ISP that does not support > this extension True for any non-standard extension (however, for this case I usually make a simple, pure-php wrapper with the dbx_function names mapped directly to the database). I would like to see more ISPs include dbx of course, and since it builds without any dependencies and has just a small footprint it should be really easy to do. > - it does not include a C API that would be useful for custom PHP > modules to access a database I have successfully used the dbx extension from within another (C++)-extension, perhaps not as clean as I would have with an API, but ok. > - it does not include an OOP API OOP-ish :-) > My dream is a "full featured" SQL extension completely replacing all > other database modules, fast, flexible, build-in by default, > recommended to be the best way to access databases in PHP. Yeah, I would have liked that too ;-). I do like the way this is solved in Python with its DB-API, however they have great namespace/module resolution... > Just my two cents.... Appreciated. Cheerio, Marc. -- PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
