List:MySQL++« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:celliott Date:September 2 2004 1:10pm
Subject:Re: library name change
View as plain text  
Personally, I'm happy with the recent changes.  After moving forward from
redhat 7.3 the library wouldn't work reliably for me for more than a year.
 The template queries were broken and my projects were in shambles.  Even
before that, I experienced several memory leaks and weird bugs with

As for making mysql++ compatible for other types of SQL databases, making
a library compatible with everything usually just adds fat which is always
a bad thing for memory / processor intensive apps like the ones usually
involving database integration.

MySQL++ is the official API for MySQL and the recent leaps forward in
compiler compatibility and c++ standards have started making it live up to
that task.

#include <my_two_cents.hh>

Chad Elliott.

> Hi,
> I was curious as to the reasoning behind the library name change from
> libsqlplus to libmysqlpp.  Was there a solid reason for this?
> I have two problems with it.  One, it breaks compatibility with compiled
> programs (they must be relinked at the minimum).  And secondly, it
> makes the library name mysql-specific.
> While working on an internal RPM for the old version of mysql++, I based
> my spec file on one by Tuan Hoang and Philipp Berndt.  There was a comment
> in the description that caught my imagination: It stated that mysql++
> may in the future support other databases as well, besides mysql.
> And if mysql++ is really as generically useful as STL, as it aims to be,
> I don't see any reason why that future support couldn't happen.
> I think the old lib name is worth keeping for these reasons.
> - Chris
> --
> MySQL++ Mailing List
> For list archives:
> To unsubscribe:

library name changeChris Frey2 Sep
  • Re: library name changecelliott2 Sep
  • Re: library name changeWarren Young3 Sep
    • Re: library name changeChris Frey3 Sep