Dmitry Yemanov wrote: > I like neither DPB solution because it's DPB. It's not a > "connection string" option, it's an API option. Surely not > a problem for ISQL users that will support it out of the > box. But most of existing user applications need to be > recompiled to use the new option. Those devs who are too > high level will have to wait until their underlying Firebird > connectivity library is updated to support the new option.
> I don't call this user-friendly, sorry. IMHO, a DDL solution > is much handier. And it's also implementable in a few hours. > Relaxed write restriction for rdb$source is probably even > easier to implement. And it doesn't require us to think about > the forward compatible syntax. And I think that last is probably the most appealing to application developers in the short term, because it should mean no change to their existing implementation scripts. That also gives more time to discuss the best way forward for Firebird - without implementing official DDL or other mechanism that we may have reason to regret/deprecate in the near future. -- Geoff Worboys Telesis Computing Pty Ltd ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Slashdot TV. Video for Nerds. Stuff that matters. http://tv.slashdot.org/ Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
