At 06:22 PM 5/30/00 -0400, Doug Chamberlin wrote:

>
>Shouldn't Connection - and all the other purely abstract classes - be
>defined as interfaces? Or does C++ not have interfaces?
>

Yes, they should be defined as interfaces. But no, C++ doesn't
have interfaces. Abstract classes are as close as we can get.
From the client's perspective, no difference. For the poor implementor,
the implementation class that both subclasses another implementation
class and a second "interface"(xxPreparedStatement, for example)
is a royal pain, but gets the job done.

Jim Starkey