GinTon wrote:
> Anyway I contacted with eyedb.org in order to know its opinion about a
> Python interface and the XML support.
I received the following answer of Eric Viara, EyeDB.org:
"We planned to introduce soon a plugin mechanism to facilitate the way
to write language bindings such as PHP5,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> If it has C++ bindings then maybe SIP could help -
> http://www.riverbankcomputing.co.uk/sip/
>
> PyQT4 bindings made with SIP are realy nice :)
These are the conclusions of several Python wrappers that shows that
SIP generates the fastest wrappers:
* Manual wrapping i
If it has C++ bindings then maybe SIP could help -
http://www.riverbankcomputing.co.uk/sip/
PyQT4 bindings made with SIP are realy nice :)
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Django developers" group.
Ian Holsman wrote:
> On 08/09/2006, at 8:03 PM, GinTon wrote:
>
> >
> > Zopdb is not based on the ODMG 3 specification but I have found a free
> > ODBMS based on the ODMG 3 specification althought it only has
> > programming interfaces for C++ and Java, but we would ask to
> > authors an
> > inter
On 08/09/2006, at 8:03 PM, GinTon wrote:
>
> Zopdb is not based on the ODMG 3 specification but I have found a free
> ODBMS based on the ODMG 3 specification althought it only has
> programming interfaces for C++ and Java, but we would ask to
> authors an
> interface for python.
> http://www.e
Zopdb is not based on the ODMG 3 specification but I have found a free
ODBMS based on the ODMG 3 specification althought it only has
programming interfaces for C++ and Java, but we would ask to authors an
interface for python.
http://www.eyedb.org/
It is very powerful, mature, safe, stable. I was
Hi off-topic'ers,
Having done a decent amount of work in both an RDBMS and an ODBMS
(mainly PostgreSQL and the ZODB). It has definitely been a love/hate
relationship for me - when I am working in an RDBMS I yearn for a
ODBMS and vice-versa. The grass is always greener ...
Some Pros for an
GinTon wrote:
> I have seen that for web applications is best far using a ODBMS:
>
> 1- Objects in an OODBMS can store an arbitrary number of atomic types
> as well as other objects. The fact that an OODBMS is better suited to
> handling complex,interrelated data than an RDBMS means that an OODBMS
On 8/31/06, Karl Guertin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 8/30/06, GinTon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I wanted to know your opinions. Since of my view point I think that the
> > web frameworks with ODBMS will be the next big step.
>
> I prefer an RDBMS because I tend to integrate with other
>
> I prefer an RDBMS because I tend to integrate with other
> projects/languages at the RDBMS level. The other advantage is that the
> RDBMS are much better tested because they're in wider use.
I second carls opinion. With RDBMS you easily create a gui app that
connects to the db used by some web
On 8/30/06, GinTon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I wanted to know your opinions. Since of my view point I think that the
> web frameworks with ODBMS will be the next big step.
I prefer an RDBMS because I tend to integrate with other
projects/languages at the RDBMS level. The other advantage is tha
Ian Holsman wrote:
> yes..
> what exactly are you proposing here?
>
> with a OODBMS you shouldn't need any of the ORM functionality.. you
> should be able to just use the other sections without
> much worry i would suspect.
>
I wanted to know your opinions. Since of my view point I think that the
yes..
what exactly are you proposing here?
with a OODBMS you shouldn't need any of the ORM functionality.. you
should be able to just use the other sections without
much worry i would suspect.
regards
Ian
On 30/08/2006, at 8:10 PM, GinTon wrote:
>
> I have seen that for web applications is be
I have seen that for web applications is best far using a ODBMS:
1- Objects in an OODBMS can store an arbitrary number of atomic types
as well as other objects. The fact that an OODBMS is better suited to
handling complex,interrelated data than an RDBMS means that an OODBMS
can outperform an RDBM
14 matches
Mail list logo
