Home > Archive > Tcl > October 2006 > Re: What is a supported method for a Tcl application to access Sybase
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Re: What is a supported method for a Tcl application to access Sybase
|
|
| Gerald W. Lester 2006-10-30, 7:32 pm |
| Larry W. Virden wrote:
> There used to be a sybtcl extension, but from what I can see, there's
> hasn't been, from what I can tell, a change in about five years to it.
Is sybtcl not working for you?
Is there a problem with something being stable and bug free?
> So what alternatives are there? Of course, the first thing I had
> suggested to me was "rewrite the app in Perl because Perl DBI is well
> supported". Assuming that I'd rather leave that option open if nothing
> else works.
--
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------------+
| Gerald W. Lester |
|"The man who fights for his ideals is the man who is alive." - Cervantes|
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| |
| Gerald W. Lester 2006-10-30, 7:32 pm |
| Larry W. Virden wrote:
> Gerald W. Lester wrote:
>
> The issue is this - the developers are uncomfortable writing
> applications that are dependant on an extension that they've been
> unable to find any support for, they don't have
> time/money/energy/interest in learning the 4000+ lines of C code well
> enough to support it themselves, and they are facing migrating to a new
> version of Sybase without confidence that the five plus year old code
> will compile and work with the code.
>
> I suggested they could just move forward and see if it would work.
> They're considering rewriting all that Tcl code into Perl so they can
> use DBI, which is actively supported .
So oratcl (which had a recent release because Oracle finally added something
new to the API) and sytcl and etc should every year or so just bump there
version number and do a new release with no changes since they have no new
features (because the API under it has no changes) or no bug fixes (because
no bugs have been erported)?
--
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------------+
| Gerald W. Lester |
|"The man who fights for his ideals is the man who is alive." - Cervantes|
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| |
| Tim Wallace 2006-10-30, 7:32 pm |
| It might be fun and informative to take a survey of which extensions
people are currently using in commercial or internal code that they
support. We right now are using tcl/tk 8.4.11, tcllib, incr tcl,
iwidgets, blt, sybtcl, oratcl, and pgtcl. And there is way too much at
stake here to let us be deterred from fixing any problems which might
pop up with our 4800 lines of sybtcl code, "supported" or not. :)
--Tim
Eckhard Lehmann wrote:
> Gerald W. Lester wrote:
>
>
> I suggest to write a short "hello" message (with some meaningful text,
> of course) to the mailing list and see whether someone responds. If so,
> it is probably supported ;-).
>
>
> Eckhard
>
| |
| Gerald W. Lester 2006-10-30, 7:32 pm |
| Tim Wallace wrote:
> It might be fun and informative to take a survey of which extensions
> people are currently using in commercial or internal code that they
> support. We right now are using tcl/tk 8.4.11, tcllib, incr tcl,
> iwidgets, blt, sybtcl, oratcl, and pgtcl. And there is way too much at
> stake here to let us be deterred from fixing any problems which might
> pop up with our 4800 lines of sybtcl code, "supported" or not. :)
We use oratcl, bwidgets, parts of TclLib and parts of TkLib.
[color=darkred]
>
> --Tim
>
> Eckhard Lehmann wrote:
--
+--------------------------------+---------------------------------------+
| Gerald W. Lester |
|"The man who fights for his ideals is the man who is alive." - Cervantes|
+------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|
|
|
|
|