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 <email@example.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.
List hosted by Total Knowledge
Authoright © Total Knowledge: 2005