Jeff Garland wrote:
Mark Blewett wrote:
dba is often used as an abbreviation of database administrator, so I believe it may confuse.
I realize....that's why I like it...
I haven't studied the documentation in detail but from the SOCI Rationale FAQ (http://soci.sourceforge.net/doc/rationale.html)
"The basic SOCI syntax was inspired by the Embedded SQL, which is part of the SQL standard, supported by the major DB technologies and even available as built-in part of the languages used in some DB-oriented integrated development environments."
I'd agree with Paul Bristow about using boost.sql.
For me SQL implies a method of accessing a relational database and is also an obvious and well know concept.
Well, actually this isn't a good name because SOCI isn't really an SQL handling library. In fact it explicitly avoids sql and focuses more on database access.
After reading Maciej Sobczak's very informative post I agree. Whilst surfing wikipedia, for inspiration I stumbled across the entry for ODBC; "In computing <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computing>, Open Database Connectivity (ODBC) provides a standard software <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software> API <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application_programming_interface> method for using database management systems <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Database_management_system> (DBMS). The designers of ODBC aimed to make it independent of programming languages <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_language>, database systems, and operating systems <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operating_system>." Boost Database Connectivity or boost.dbc?
boost.database initially sounds nice if you only work with relational databases, but once you consider the mryaid of other types of databases (object based, hierarchical, temporal,.dimensional...) I feel it's not specific enough.
The reason I'm ok with dropping the 'Relational' is that relational db's the 80% case (or more, sadly) and folks looking for the other databases are specialists that will figure out in 2 seconds of document study that boost.dbaccess isn't for them.
I agree, but if there's a name out there which conveys what the libray is about in a short and precise way it would surely help. However I know choosing a name is one of the most difficult and controversial things in software engineering! Regards Mark