[V4RB] design of future pluign

[john roberts]

on 5/21/03 5:30 PM, Ruslan Zasukhin at sunshine at public.kherson.ua wrote:

>> Can we not more logically have two distinct objects -- VDataBase for local
>> work (and legacy code) and VDataBaseServer for client access to a server?
>> 
>> Did I miss something??
> 
> No. And it seems this can be good way.
> 
> Problem is next. Okay, so we will have 2 Database classes in 2 different
> plugins.
> 
> What about all rest classes. For example Vfield and VCursor?
> REALbasic do not allow us to have 2 the same classes in 2 different plugins.

This would mean that you would have to maintain two separate code bases for
each of your products even though there would be major overlap in the logic
and implementation. This in turn would require one of:

    1)  two separate compilations or
    2)  mutually exclusive namespaces.

The 1st would mean that we could not write apps covering both server and
local situations. The 2nd would require code duplication both for you, us
and the solutions we provide.

I still like the idea of a single "server" situation. Licensing (by
Paradigma) would control whether the "server" is a single connection or
multiple connection. Each client would be able to "talk" locally or
remotely. In the single-person case, this would allow the database and
client to reside on one machine or on separate machines. Scalability would
then be a matter of licensing more Valentina seats or more clients.

John Roberts