Re: GNOME Database kit

[Christopher Blizzard <blizzard appliedtheory com>]

Adam Keys wrote:
> 
> > Sort of.  ODBC isn't deathly complex although I wouldn't describe it as
> > simple either.  It's pretty well thought out and well documented.  For
> > some examples of ODBC drivers you can look at the most recent ODBC
> > driver kit ( 3.5 ) from MS which contains the source code for the trace
> > driver.  Also, take a look at the source code for the MyODBC driver as
> > well.  Then get scared. :)
> 
> I don't want to be scared.  If you are a competent coder and you are
> scared by some code, then it probably isn't done as well as it could be.
> 

It's not that bad.

> My questions about ODBC are 1) is it proprietary and 2) does it fit into
> the GNOME scheme of things well?
> 

ODBC isn't really propriatary.  It's based on X/Open and ISO standards. 
It would fit into any application that wanted database access so I guess
in that sense it would fit into the gnome scheme of things.

> I agree the ODBC is well thought out, but there are things I think we
> could to better.
> 
> My non-ODBC question is this.  How bindable is C++?  AFAIK, gtk+ is
> written in C which makes binding other languages like perl or Python
> relatively simple.  Is C++ this way?  C++ really works so much better
> AFAIK for this type of abstraction, and I'd like to work from that
> angle, but I fear that would lock out perl, Python, etc coders.
> 
> Adam Keys

ODBC is a C call level interface so it's pretty easy to bind to other
languages.  In fact, a lot of scripting languages already have ODBC
bindings except there's not usually ODBC drivers for Unix type systems.

--Chris

-- 

------------
Christopher Blizzard
http://odin.appliedtheory.com/
------------