On Sat, 2004-04-17 at 10:25, Paul J Stevens wrote: > Anton, > > Anton Nekhoroshih wrote: > > I think creation function db_put_message (id) and db_get_message (id) > > will considerably simplify operation with various databases as other > > syntax SQL of inquiries is identical.
I do think we should change the names of the functions to db_put_message_contents() and db_get_message_contents() (or something similar) to avoid confusion with other functions. > > I very much agree. The execution paths for inserting and retreiving > messages are currently very complex and therefor error prone. I think > Ilja's problem in tracking down the parse error just proves this point. I don't really know if this solves that problem right away. I think the current problems are caused by the complex handling of input from the network stream. Sometimes I'm wondering about how much simpler things would be if we were using a language that is better suited to working with strings etc.... > > Defining a cleaner and more abstract api will allow new applications and > better versions of the current applications to be better maintainable, > will make it simpler to develop new applications (ie dbmail-nntp, > dbmail-admin, dbmail-admin-gnome, dbmail-xxx ?) that will not need > rewriting when changes in the storage engine occur. Agreed. Ilja
