On 6/17/2010 11:51, Henry Vermaak wrote:
On 17 June 2010 16:43, waldo kitty<[email protected]> wrote:
i still find it amazing, though, that in today's world, so many opt to use a
sql database of some kind even for smallish projects where a nice simple
self-designed binary data file would suffice... in many cases, it is akin to
swatting a fly with a hydrogen bomb ;)
I still find it amazing, in today's world, that so many opt to re-invent the
> wheel.
i'm not speaking of wheels or reinventing... but since you bring it up, i'm sure
i'm not the only one who would rather reinvent and know what their code is doing
rather than use some library code (MFC for instance) that's buggy as hades and
has all kinds of sneak pathways in it... sure, the hackers and spammers love
code like that but...
and what can you do to fix library code? without the sources and a deep
understanding of what it does and how it does it, well... i think you know where
that's drifting off to ;)
Why would you design your own buggy binary data file that only your program
can read,
what makes a binary (or flat or XML) data file buggy?? that doesn't make
sense... did i step on a nerve or something??
is there something wrong with me supplying the format of the data file to those
who want/need to read it? i don't think so... in fact, i recall a time when
developer's kits were pretty much exactly that... header files, record
structures, flow charts, possibly even some documentation... in fact, i still
use developer's kits for numerous apps that i work with...
and why would someone want to use some sql data base format where they are
required to use a special interface (sql) and method of access (database server)
to manipulate their data when they can do it faster and easier in their own
storage formats??
besides, XML is a good example as well since everyone and their mother seem to
see it as a huge step forward for some reason... i see it as being more
complicated than other available options but then again, i see how so many
things are really nothing new and how, deep in their heart, they are still the
same old methods and procedures that have been used since these machines first
came into being...
when you can use a safe, tested, fast embedded database? I hardly call a
500k shared library a hydrogen bomb.
then you missed my point... that point being that a database is not necessary in
many cases where they are used... speaking of embedded, what does a
refrigerator, microwave oven, convection oven, coffee maker or toaster oven need
with a database? for that matter, what does a security camera, laser measure
tool, or television need with a database? i mean, seriously...
but they (storage formats) are "neat" and "cool" and one can say "my apps use
this!" or "my apps use that!" so i guess it helps to raise one's perspective of
one's or one's app's abilities... i see the same thing coming from both sides of
the fence, so no one is in the clear, really ;)
then again, one can also shave another 500k off of their application's footprint
if they don't have to use that 500k shared library code that could be buggy and
full of sneak paths thru it that the hackers just love to find ;)
--
_______________________________________________
Lazarus mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
