[Lazarus] Embedded database for Lazarus/Linux

[waldo kitty]

On 6/17/2010 11:51, Henry Vermaak wrote:
> On 17 June 2010 16:43, waldo kitty<wkitty42 at windstream.net>  wrote:
>>
>> i still find it amazing, though, that in today's world, so many opt to use a
>> sql database of some kind even for smallish projects where a nice simple
>> self-designed binary data file would suffice... in many cases, it is akin to
>> swatting a fly with a hydrogen bomb ;)
>
> I still find it amazing, in today's world, that so many opt to re-invent the
 > wheel.

i'm not speaking of wheels or reinventing... but since you bring it up, i'm sure 
i'm not the only one who would rather reinvent and know what their code is doing 
rather than use some library code (MFC for instance) that's buggy as hades and 
has all kinds of sneak pathways in it... sure, the hackers and spammers love 
code like that but...

and what can you do to fix library code? without the sources and a deep 
understanding of what it does and how it does it, well... i think you know where 
that's drifting off to ;)

> Why would you design your own buggy binary data file that only your program
> can read,

what makes a binary (or flat or XML) data file buggy?? that doesn't make 
sense... did i step on a nerve or something??

is there something wrong with me supplying the format of the data file to those 
who want/need to read it? i don't think so... in fact, i recall a time when 
developer's kits were pretty much exactly that... header files, record 
structures, flow charts, possibly even some documentation... in fact, i still 
use developer's kits for numerous apps that i work with...

and why would someone want to use some sql data base format where they are 
required to use a special interface (sql) and method of access (database server) 
to manipulate their data when they can do it faster and easier in their own 
storage formats??

besides, XML is a good example as well since everyone and their mother seem to 
see it as a huge step forward for some reason... i see it as being more 
complicated than other available options but then again, i see how so many 
things are really nothing new and how, deep in their heart, they are still the 
same old methods and procedures that have been used since these machines first 
came into being...

> when you can use a safe, tested, fast embedded database?  I hardly call a
> 500k shared library a hydrogen bomb.

then you missed my point... that point being that a database is not necessary in 
many cases where they are used... speaking of embedded, what does a 
refrigerator, microwave oven, convection oven, coffee maker or toaster oven need 
with a database? for that matter, what does a security camera, laser measure 
tool, or television need with a database? i mean, seriously...

but they (storage formats) are "neat" and "cool" and one can say "my apps use 
this!" or "my apps use that!" so i guess it helps to raise one's perspective of 
one's or one's app's abilities... i see the same thing coming from both sides of 
the fence, so no one is in the clear, really ;)

then again, one can also shave another 500k off of their application's footprint 
if they don't have to use that 500k shared library code that could be buggy and 
full of sneak paths thru it that the hackers just love to find ;)