From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,9c5be310aaba832e,start X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: cts@kampong.aedinc.net (Craig Spannring) Subject: Databases and Ada95 Date: 2000/02/04 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 581588115 X-Trace: newsfeed.slurp.net 949685064 208.132.31.130 (Fri, 04 Feb 2000 11:24:24 CDT) Organization: Multimedia Inc. Keywords: SAMEDL ADASAME SQL NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 04 Feb 2000 11:24:24 CDT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 2000-02-04T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: I'm kind of in the dark about accessing databases from Ada95. I've seen mention of SAME and SAMEDL, but I can't seem to locate any documentation about those. Does anyone actually use/support those? Unless something else pops It looks like my options are 1) Use thin bindings to whatever C library the DB vendor supplies. 2) Write thick bindings to the vendor supplied C library. 3) Use thin bindings to ODBC. 4) Use Pascal Obry's bindings to ODBC. The 3rd and 4th choices only work for MS-Windows. Choice 1 means my code would be specific to one RDBMS not to mention messy. Choice 2 requires a lot of work, but if the bindings were done properly, the calling code could be (mostly) database independent in roughly the same way JDBC applications are DB independent; Only the package body for the bindings would have to be rewritten for each RDBMS. If I can't find a better solution I'm leaning toward #2. I'd rather not reinvent wheels I don't have to, namely the package specification. Are there (documented) database access specifications available? -- ======================================================================= Life is short. | Craig Spannring Bike hard, ski fast. | cts@internetcds.com --------------------------------+------------------------------------