> At 5/30/00 06:03 PM (Tuesday), Jim Starkey wrote:
> > >C. "Connection *connection = createConnection();"
> > >So you prefer to ban things like "Connection* connection = new
> > >Connection();" ?
> > >Or "Connection connection;" ?
> > >Anyway, we at least require some releaseConnection() or

freeConnection() to

> > >free resources, then.
> > >
> >
> >First, that won't compile because Connection is an abstract class --
> >it is a pure interface with no code behind it. The actual Connection
> >object will be a subclass of Connection substantiated by a Jdbc
> >driver/subsystem.
>

I switched my IB-Architect account from Digest to Normal mode right after my
post.
Now, from somebody else post, I understand Jim has made comments on my
comments.
And I have not received those, nor as digest, or as individual messages.

Would someone be kind enough to repost to me any replies that were posted on
Jim's initial message about the New API ? Please, to my email address
om@... and not to the list !

Thank you very much,

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Olivier Mascia T.I.P. Group SA
om@... www.tipgroup.com
Director, Chief Software Architect +32 65 401111

----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Chamberlin" <dchamberlin@...>
To: <IB-Architect@egroups.com>; <IB-Architect@egroups.com>;
<IB-Architect@egroups.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2000 12:22 AM
Subject: Re: [IB-Architect] Re: New API -- Request for Comments


> At 5/30/00 06:03 PM (Tuesday), Jim Starkey wrote:
> > >C. "Connection *connection = createConnection();"
> > >So you prefer to ban things like "Connection* connection = new
> > >Connection();" ?
> > >Or "Connection connection;" ?
> > >Anyway, we at least require some releaseConnection() or
freeConnection() to
> > >free resources, then.
> > >
> >
> >First, that won't compile because Connection is an abstract class --
> >it is a pure interface with no code behind it. The actual Connection
> >object will be a subclass of Connection substantiated by a Jdbc
> >driver/subsystem.
>
> Shouldn't Connection - and all the other purely abstract classes - be
> defined as interfaces? Or does C++ not have interfaces?
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Failed tests, classes skipped, forgotten locker combinations.
> Remember the good 'ol days
> http://click.egroups.com/1/4053/4/_/830676/_/959727075/
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> IB-Architect-unsubscribe@onelist.com
>
>