On 10/08/2014 11:44, Dimitry Sibiryakov wrote: > 10.08.2014 11:11, Reinier Olislagers wrote: >> Of course, my view is that it should be the other way round: FB should >> be compatible with languages, but your answer is clear enough. > > It is compatible. It's C++ interface is compatible with MSVC and GCC. It's > C interface > is compatible with everyone who is compatible with C. Firebird isn't written > in Pascal > (Java, ADA, Cobol, Basic, Prolog, Python, PHP, LUA, etc), that's why it > doesn't provide > native Pascal (Java, ADA, Cobol, Basic, Prolog, Python, PHP, LUA, etc) > interface. > Situation is simple: either you (can) use one of two interfaces provided > by Firebird or > not. The latter is not Firebird problem.
Yes, I obviously wasn't asking for native <insert language here> interfaces and I understood that the C interface would be usable for languages that cannot interface with C++. However, apparently FB devs don't think it's important to keep it in sync with the C++ interface - even if third parties could submit patches for that. So in effect, new FB (features) will not be compatible with any language that does not have C++ support. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
