Hi,
> I approve of your translation.
That interpretation concerns the relative merits of using the separate
sources vs the amalgamation, if I understand correctly. Barring
special circumstances, the use of the amalgamation is the preferred
way; that is understood.
What I was wondering is whether the SQLite docs (written by you, I
presume) express a preference for using SQLite3 via inclusion of the
source (amalgamation) into ones project, vs. using a pre-compiled
library (as could be provided, for example, by a linux distribution).
Some readings of the documentation suggest that SQLite advocates
direct inclusion over using the software as a library:
"The amalgamation contains everything you need to integrate
SQLite into a larger project. Just copy the amalgamation into your
source directory and compile it along with the other C code files in
your project. " - http://www.sqlite.org/amalgamation.html
"The use of the amalgamation is recommended for all
applications." - http://www.sqlite.org/howtocompile.html
I wonder if that is the case. I think that using SQLite3 via library
and via source are both actively supported ways of using the library,
as evidenced by the distribution of both the amalgamated source and a
tarbal where a configure/make/make install will yield a library. The
choice should be left to the user, depending on their circumstances.
I am wondering where you stand on this.
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
