sptk



[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: one more lib for SPTK



1) SPTK was never aiming to embedded devices. If you want to do it -
we can create a different toolkit with totally different approach.
Once again, that STL crap I'm using should never be in embedded
toolkit.
2) Having database API is a plus - not a disadvantage. If user doesn't
want to use it - that's fine. If not - he can exclude it by defining
it in configure. If you want to make it smaller - we don't have to
divide the library. We just have to exclude unneeded parts.
3) If someone has same classnames as SPTK _AND_ he has compiled ODBC
in SPTK - was to bad because he's probably an idiot. At least, some
mental problems are presented.

BTW, one of the secrets of popularity of PHP (the best web tool, imho)
is a very easy access to databases.

2005/9/29, Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh <ilya@total-knowledge.com>:
> "Business usage"
> Think web GUI in embedded appliance with _very_ limited resources.
> Think about having 32M of RAM as luxury. These aren't some random numbers
> I pulled out of my ass - most low-end routers nowdays have that kind of
> resources.
>
> Currently web GUI for devices like that are some sort of CGI scripts -
> which isn't
> very nice thing to program.
>
> Java API is lot better - but running java on such device is clear
> overkill. CPPSERV is
> ideal use, yet, there is no need for database - all such thing would
> need is access to XML
> API.
>
> BTW, CPPSERV itself should never aim at providing database API, nor
> should directly
> link to any particular one. Instead, it's decision of servlet writer.
>
> Yes, we could (and abviously you do) provide database access API
> alongside, which
> integrates nicely into it, but we shouldn't force it on end userd,
> because, let's face it,
> there are far more programs out there that are not using SPTK for
> database, then those
> that are.
>
> Which is yet another reason to unbind utility classes from database classes.
> Imagine what would happen if someone wanted to write a servlet using
> database API
> XZZY that also has classes named CQuery and CDatabase in it...
>
>
>
> Alexey Parshin wrote:
>
> >Every bit aint matter for the last 10yrs (I don't know where have you
> >been all this time). There is no useful application these day that
> >isn't using databases. At least, in business. The dependencies are
> >cut-off with configure. If SPTK has something that you need to exclude
> >- offer more options in configure instead. Just remember - SPTK was
> >designed mostly to provide GUI+DB. If you can use it for something
> >else - that's fine. In CPPServ, for instance - you'd need to provide
> >database access, otherwise its business usage is very limited.
> >
> >2005/9/29, Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh <ilya@total-knowledge.com>:
> >
> >
> >>Problem 1:
> >>Loading of unneeded code (I'm thinking embedded here)
> >>
> >>
> >For embedded you need something much better using memory than SPTK. I
> >sacrificed the efficiency of old SPTK classes to the standards of STL
> >:(
> >
> >
> >
> >>Problem 2:
> >>Dependancy on unneeded tools (partially solved when you separated GUI
> >>and database)
> >>
> >>
> >Yes, and if we have anything else here - lets discuss it. Doesn't make
> >much sense, though. 99% Windows and many Linux machines already have
> >everything to install full-blown SPTK. If not - than we are talking
> >about some home machine, and it's not clear for me what SPTK is doing
> >there :)
> >
> >
> >
> >>Problem 3:
> >>Readability
> >>
> >>
> >Come on :) Same classes would be groupped differently?
> >
> >
> >
> >>In case of CPPSERV, there is no need in any database-related stuff, but
> >>
> >>
> >That is a mistake. If you really want people to use it of'course. Just
> >imagine someone who isn't happy with anything else but CPPServ - and
> >not using database? That's funny :)
> >
> >
> >
> >>I can make
> >>good use of most of other utilities (Registry, XML, Threading).
> >>
> >>
> >I understand that part.
> >
> >
> >
> >>Now, if I ever decide to use it in embedded application, every bit will
> >>matter.
> >>
> >>
> >I don't beleive in STL usage for embedded devices. STL is wasting
> >memory and application size like crazy. It's also slower than regular
> >classes, even if they require more work.
> >
> >
>
> --
> Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh
> Total Knowledge. CTO
> http://www.total-knowledge.com
>
>


--
Alexey Parshin,
http://www.sptk.net

List hosted by Total Knowledge

Authoright © Total Knowledge: 2005