RE: [gnome-db]Re: Anderson Clayton's helping demand

["Laurent Marzullo" <laurent marzullo be sema com>]

> Hi!
>
>
> Well, as far as I've seen, your bindings are not correct. I don't mean
> that they're bad, but they've got some "problems":
> * you're using OAF/GConf directly: don't do this please. The reason for
> the existance of the libgda-common is to serve as a wrapper for all
> those things, to allow porting everything to another system by just
> changing that library. What the C++ bindings must do is to use directly
> the functions in the libgda-common library/libgda-client, etc

	Yes I know. But as I said, my philosophy is to write a real C++ code.
	So, I make a wrapper for GConf and one for CORBA  (Which is not really
	a wrapper but just a class and some function to use them in a C++ way)
	So, use libgda function is not possible in this philosophy.

	I know that this philosphy will bring to make up change in two sources
	instead of only one. But the problem is how to do a wrapper ?
	What I mean is:
		1 May we do a wrapper for only libgda-server & libgda-client using
		  libgda-common C library (and not a libgda-common C++ lib)

		2 May we do a wrapper for all 3 libraries and use libgda-common
		  function for GConf and CORBA.

		3 May we do a wrapper for all 3 lib and for GConf & CORBA.
		  (Wrapper for GConf & CORBA could be seen as a separate
		  project ...)

	For me, 2 is the best one, because for (3) perhaps it will be more
	suitable to see wrapper for GConf & CORBA as separate project which
	will not be part of libgdamm.

> * namespace: you're using an ambigous namespace for all your files. You
> should name them in a form similar to the rest (gda-client.h,
> gda-common.h, etc). What about CGdaConnection.h, CGdaCommon.h? or
> whatever you prefer, but use something to uniquely identify your header
> files.

	ok, first you speak about file name and not namespace :-)
	There's no problem to me to change file name. My preference goes
	to name file with Cap like GDACommon.h, GDAServer.h etc, but to
	be in harmony with libgda & gnome-db file name perhaps shouldn't we
	use Cap in file name ? I don't really know what is prefereable for
	file name.

	but GDACommon.h GDAProvider.h GDAApp.h GDADSN.h it's ok.


> * also, a small correction: you're talking, in the comments, about
> gnome-db. This is wrong, those are the C++ bindings for libgda, so all
> references to gnome-db should be changed to libgda

	Ha! ok, no problem
>
> cheers
>


Laurent