Hi,
> IMO there are some problems with the dbx extension:
>
> - it is a wrapper for PHP modules instead for the underlying
> database API (therefore slower)
True, but this makes for a lot less build-headaches: dbx has no
build-dependencies
> - you cannot rely on it if you depend on an ISP that does not support
> this extension
True for any non-standard extension (however, for this case I usually make a
simple, pure-php wrapper with the dbx_function names mapped directly to the
database). I would like to see more ISPs include dbx of course, and since it
builds without any dependencies and has just a small footprint it should be
really easy to do.
> - it does not include a C API that would be useful for custom PHP
> modules to access a database
I have successfully used the dbx extension from within another
(C++)-extension, perhaps not as clean as I would have with an API, but ok.
> - it does not include an OOP API
OOP-ish :-)
> My dream is a "full featured" SQL extension completely replacing all
> other database modules, fast, flexible, build-in by default,
> recommended to be the best way to access databases in PHP.
Yeah, I would have liked that too ;-). I do like the way this is solved in
Python with its DB-API, however they have great namespace/module
resolution...
> Just my two cents....
Appreciated.
Cheerio, Marc.
