Mark Miesfeld <miesf...@gmail.com> wrote: > Yesterday when I said that adding encryption did not change the database > size by much, I was wrong.
Do you mean /binaries/ size? [snip] > The advantage of static linking is that the Rexx user does not need to > install anything else for ooSQLite to work. And also that you know (for problem diagnosis) that they're using what you built (assuming they didn't build their own version). >Right now I'm thinking of having one ooSQLite.cls file with the key and >rekey methods, a method for checking if the loaded DLL has encryption >support or not, and adding encryption support enabled / disabled to the >output of the version command. If the DLL without encryption support is >loaded, then key and rekey return an error code if invoked. Can one also test the DLL version from rexx easily? Perhaps it would be useful if one could say to rexx: please ensure there's a DLL which offers facilities X, Y, Z, of at least version number P.Q.R loaded...? >There are other ways to do this of course. There could be two completely >separate packages with different file names. Or there could only be the >DLL with encryption support. > >Wonder what people think here. I wonder how one would set up multiple versions of the DLL for, say, migration testing of a live app from one level of SQLite to another. Provided there's an easy way to handle that, I doubt it matters much. The drawback of multiple packages with different names is it could be the thin end of a wedge... leading to many packages one day all offering slightly different things. -- Jeremy Nicoll - my opinions are my own ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_sfd2d_oct _______________________________________________ Oorexx-users mailing list Oorexx-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-users
