Anyone out there successfully using Pro*C/C++ in C++ mode?
Ramon F Herrera
So far I had been mostly satisfied with Pro*C/C++. It is a huge
improvement from by previous programming environment (OCI. I can't
believe I ever programmed in that assembly language). All my programs
have been written written in C so far. However, since I have been
known to get myself into trouble :-) I decided to try the C++ side of
Pro*C/C++, to take it for a spin.
Long story short: It was a bad decision, and I decided to go back to
good ole' C.
Reasoning:
(1) That is not real C++. I use C++ for the convenience of 'string',
for instance, and the pre-compiler forces me to use some strange (from
the C++ programming language viewpoint) VARCHARs and declare things
inside some weird blocks.
(2) I have been unable to pass the linking stage on any non-trivial
app. The most I have done is to run the provided examples.
(3) Even in C, a very simple programming language, I have found the
Oracle implementation to be rather primitive (compared to gcc). I
shudder to think the kinds of mess I would get myself into if I tried
to uses classes.
I guess the follow-up question is: Has anyone out there been able to
use classes in conjunction to Pro*C/C++? I highly doubt it.
Bonus question: My Oracle version is 10g. Has Pro*C/C++ improved much
along these 5 years? I am considering the perennial question: to
upgrade or not to upgrade?
TIA,
-Ramon
Noons
> (3) Even in C, a very simple programming language, I have found the
> Oracle implementation to be rather primitive (compared to gcc). I
> shudder to think the kinds of mess I would get myself into if I tried
> to uses classes.
I was not aware Oracle had a C compiler implementation?
> I guess the follow-up question is: Has anyone out there been able to
> use classes in conjunction to Pro*C/C++? I highly doubt it.
Nope, never bothered. C++ is most definitely not on as a OO language, no point
in wasting time with it. If I wanted to use a OOL, C++ would be my last choice.
> Bonus question: My Oracle version is 10g. Has Pro*C/C++ improved much
> along these 5 years? I am considering the perennial question: to
> upgrade or not to upgrade?
It hasn't changed much except for optimisations to do with the client-side cache
and so on. And that's a good thing, IMHO. Doesn't mean one should not upgrade
past 10g, if nothing else to get the latest on the db. If it doesn't cause
compatibility problems with current applications, I'm all for it.
Till Eulenspiegel
> I was not aware Oracle had a C compiler implementation?
Yes it does. It's called "SUN C Compiler". You can find out more here:
http://developers.sun.com/sunstudio/
--
A camel is a horse designed by a committee.
Noons
> On Mon, 05 Oct 2009 18:15:50 +1000, Noons wrote:
>
>> I was not aware Oracle had a C compiler implementation?
>
>
>
> Yes it does. It's called "SUN C Compiler". You can find out more here:
>
> http://developers.sun.com/sunstudio/
>
The purchase of Sun is not finalized yet so it is incorrect to label anything
Sun as Oracle's, particularly from the historical point of view.
Frank van Bortel
> Ramon F Herrera wrote,on my timestamp of 5/10/2009 12:06 AM:
>
>
>
>> (3) Even in C, a very simple programming language, I have found the
>> Oracle implementation to be rather primitive (compared to gcc). I
>> shudder to think the kinds of mess I would get myself into if I tried
>> to uses classes.
>
> I was not aware Oracle had a C compiler implementation?
>
>
translates you sql-statements into inline C compliant SQL calls.
Then, pull the outcome through your favorite C/C++ compiler.
Been a long time since... TI System V (SVR4), Oracle V5.
RPT/RPF could not deliver...
--
Regards,
Frank van Bortel