Valentina?, [ NEW DB API]

[Marc Van Olmen]

Hi Ruslan,

I'm doing my first project with Realbasic, but as you maybe know I'm one of
the part time engineers of iShell, and have a lot of database experience...
But indeed I'm already thinking about doing what you are saying writing my
database classes etc... Maybe we should setup a mailing list and discuss it
there to see what API we can come up with.

Indeed, Especially the control's are very poor for the moment, automatically
filling a table, having an EditField that handles numbers, date, time
correctly etc... There are a few 3rd party plugin's that does this but it
should be done automatic.

What's you plan of action? My personal experience is that not many people on
a mailing list want to help out in these kind of things but I'm new to this
mailing list.

Cheers,

mvo






> Hi Marc,
> 
>>> No, V4RB provide now its own OO - way, that is supported in all other OO
>>> languages (C++, Java, ...).
>>> 
>>> We speak about RBDB support at least 2 years now.
>>> Problem is that I not very like current API of RBDB...
>>> 
>>> I have suggest to REAL provide new elegant DB API interface, based on
>>> interface classes, something similar to Valentina API now, or to ADO in
>>> Visual BASIC of Microsoft. For example:
>>> 
>>>   Idatabase
>>>   Icursor
>>>   Ifield
>>>   Iconnection
>>>   Idatasources
>>> 
>>>   And all controls and their functions expect them on input.
>>>   Now it is quite easy put on this interfaces any db.
>>>   Microsoft also have work on support of not only Relation DBMS
>>>   but from any non-relational data source. REAL even do not consider
>>>   this point for now.
>>> 
>>> For 2.0 I will not way and must take some decision. Or to use current RBDB,
>>> Or hope for new one. But I afraid the longer it takes, the more hard will be
>>> this task for REAL. On the other hand, Microsoft have the same history. They
>>> have 3 times have totally change DB API. Just pity that REALbasic repeat
>>> repeat the same mistakes of Visual BASIC.
>> Ruslan,
>> 
>> I trust your decision on this and I have no doubt that your API is superior
>> then the one from Real, with all respect of course for the work they did.
>> So, maybe make it possible to plugin other databases in your API, maybe it
>> is already possible today. I probably can do the mySQL/postgress port....And
>> hopefully in long run Real can take over your API. If they also realize
>> this...
>> 
>> Just some thoughts don't want to change your busy schedule..
>> 
>> Thx for you always clear and detailed answers.
> 
> Important to have not API for API self.
> Important is that RB controls must use that API.
> 
> In fact, yes, I think we all together can develop set of
>   "Database Interface classes"
> 
> I have see that many developers have re-invent this task.
> Having this set of interfaces polished, yes we can get at least similar API
> for most DBs. And having this done may be it will be more easy for REAL to
> switch on it, just add new functions to DB controls.
> 
> Marc, this was really good idea!!!
> 
> *************************************************************************
> So may be REALbasic developers really will join efforts to develop this?!
> *************************************************************************
> 
> As first step I think it needs to find on RB list few letters of developers
> who ALREADY have develop own classes to hide Oracle, Postgre mySQL,
> Valentina into the same interface.
> 
> Note, that in fact this is NOT many work!
> We need just write all together about 5 interface classes with average 100
> lines per class.
> 
> When we get this interface classes ready, we all say
>   "this is new stabdard".
> 
> After this everybody can port mySQL or Postgre or Oraacle to this API.
> This work will looks as simply creation subclasses Database_Oracle,
> cursor_Oracle, ... And me too will must update V4RB to inherit from this
> interface classes.
> 
> Note, that if some db has specific features, then in this subclasses we can
> easy add them. If now developer work with Database_Oracle as Idatabase then
> he have access to "standard features". If he decice to use something Oracle
> specific he can do type cast to Ddatabase_Oracle and use its features.
> Explicit and safe way.