Re: one more lib for SPTK

["Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh" <ilya@total-knowledge.com>]

I agree - that we may not want to have too many of them.
However, being able to separate generic utility from non-generic
libs would be fine.

More, currently, you _must_ have spdb in order to compile sptk,
since many of sptk classes are tied to CQuery. I don't know if it makes
sense to separate them in this case.
Right thing to do I guess would be to have DB-dependant GUI, and 
DP-independant
GUI separate.

(I presume you actually have DB-independant GUI)

actually, it would be OK to have spdb and sptk as is, as long as no database
related classes would be compiled when --disable-odbc is used.

As for sputil stuff - it's just for clarity, because having to link with 
-lspdb3 when
you are not using database feels just wrong.



Alexey Parshin wrote:

> So, we need a separate libs for :
>
> 1) Threads
> 2) DB
> 3) XML
> 4) ...
>
> Please, be reasonable. This is working just fine. If someone doesn't
> need XML or DB - he can always define it in configure. I really don't
> want to multiply these libs.
>
> 2005/9/29, Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh <ilya@total-knowledge.com>:
>  
>
> > So, I looked at SPTK, and think one more large change needs to
> > be done:
> > we need to separate utility classes and database classes.
> >
> > I propose that we create libsputil3 library, that will have things like
> > CDateTime, CThread, etc.
> >
> > Only question here, is wether we should separate XML stuff as well, or
> > just live it in util library.
> >
> > --
> > Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh
> > Total Knowledge. CTO
> > http://www.total-knowledge.com
> >
> >
> >    
>
>
> --
> Alexey Parshin,
> http://www.sptk.net
>  

--
Ilya A. Volynets-Evenbakh
Total Knowledge. CTO
http://www.total-knowledge.com