10.08.2014 14:02, Dmitry Yemanov wrote: > If this is found being impossible
IMHO, it is possible, but not by reinventing VMT for everyone: users of incompatible compilers just have to use structures and pointers to emulate "standard" VMT. Democracy works in this case. > 1) Do we keep the existing OO Y-valve API for internal purposes? > Maybe some interfaces could be simplified in this case. IMHO, yes and yes. > 2) Do we offer the existing OO Y-valve API to other C++ users? In version 3 - no because of question 1: it must be significantly modified before become usable by public. (Those who think that SQLDA is PITA, really should try to use message buffers.) > 3) Do we keep using the legacy ISC API as the "plain C" wrapper for > non-C++ users or invent a better replacement? "Inventing of better replacement" means rewriting of existing wrappers. That's why answer is "yes, we should keep legacy API and extending it as little and as effective as possible". It means many thinking before coding. -- WBR, SD. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
