Re: [Firebird-net-provider] Structs

2015-08-23 Thread Ivan Arabadzhiev
Hi,
It seems to me to be mostly a matter of perspective - those 'units' should
be small enough not to make a difference at runtime. Personally, I prefer
to keep small stuff as a struct, unless it offers functionality, but .net
doesn't really run on hw ancient enough for anyone to notice in those cases
:)

2015-08-23 18:49 GMT+03:00 Jiří Činčura j...@cincura.net:

 Hi *,

 Anybody feels like giving me reason why not to make FbTransactionOptions,
 FbDatabasesInfo and FbServerConfig classes? I don't see a single reason to
 have struct here. In fact quite contrary. OK, maybe the
 FbTransactionOptions could make it.

 --
 Mgr. Jiří Činčura
 Independent IT Specialist


 --
 ___
 Firebird-net-provider mailing list
 Firebird-net-provider@lists.sourceforge.net
 https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider

--
___
Firebird-net-provider mailing list
Firebird-net-provider@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider


[Firebird-net-provider] Structs

2015-08-23 Thread Jiří Činčura
Hi *,

Anybody feels like giving me reason why not to make FbTransactionOptions, 
FbDatabasesInfo and FbServerConfig classes? I don't see a single reason to have 
struct here. In fact quite contrary. OK, maybe the FbTransactionOptions could 
make it.

-- 
Mgr. Jiří Činčura
Independent IT Specialist

--
___
Firebird-net-provider mailing list
Firebird-net-provider@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-net-provider