I was offering constructive criticism.
I also stated mysql++ has many very nice features. Yes, I am using
mysql++ and I really appreciate your assistance. Thank you.
But I do think there there are a few design issues.
1) Macros are very difficult to debug. You can't step into a macro.
I had to go through a ssqls 50 columns in length and eliminate each
column one by one to figure out what the offending type was.
Compile time errors are always more desirable than segmentation
faults. If blob types need to be initialized ahead of time the
compiler should indicate that requirement, not a seg. fault.
Better use of RAII would be advisable in this case.
2) It is common to have tables > 50 columns in length. The need to
change a field in a perl script in order to allow their creation is
not desirable. Also the large size of the generated header file can
3) The need to use the MYSQLPP_SSQLS_NO_STATICS macro is undesirable
when a client of the mysql++ library wants to create a header file of
4) Using namespaces to workaround an issue with auto increment fields
was not the language's (c++) intended use for namespaces. Although,
Jim W. suggested there might be another route.
5) Exceptions might be overused, depending upon the author's
definition of what is an exceptional circumstance.
Any library even the c++ standard libraries should be able to and
eager to receive criticism from time to time. It is not a personal
attack in any sense. I am sorry if it seemed that way.
On Aug 13, 2007, at 6:17 PM, Warren Young wrote:
> Graham Reitz wrote:
>> That's unfortunate and really suggests a larger design issue with
>> the mysql++ library.
> So ignoring the fact that my answer to Jim probably removes this
> particular objection of yours to the design of the library...
> I gave you a big opening in my reply to your first post here to
> offer concrete ideas about how you think SSQLS should work if you
> could redesign it. No response. You've proceeded to complain
> about something new almost every day since then. That tells me
> you're just going to complain and never actually offer anything
> positive. The evidence cannot speak to "forever", but so far
> that's the direction of the trend line.
> I don't much care whether you use MySQL++ or not. If you do,
> that's great. If not...*shrug*. All I ask is that if you're going
> to criticize the library's design, you make a reasoned proposal of
> what to do instead. It's open source, and I'm certain you're a
> programmer. You could help if you wanted, so if all you do is
> complain, that tells me volumes about your motivation.