Using DBI methods

[J. Paul Reed]

On Mon, 19 Aug 2002, Gervase Markham wrote:

> I'm not convinced - I find the abstraction we have, with its one standard
> method of doing things, easy to understand and very readable.  The syntax
> above is ugly :-)

It may be ugly, but *every* programmer who's *ever* done anything with the
Perl DBI will recognize it immediately, and they won't have to learn
Bugzilla's odd way of doing things.

I personally like the idea that we move towards a more standardized (and
dare I say "normal") way of doing things.

> > 4) No more state stack
> >   - don't have to worry about forgetting to push/pop the state stack -
> > simply get a new statement handle when you need one from teh globally
> > available dbh when needed.
>
> This is hardly a burden - usually, it's really obvious when you've
> forgotten.

In terms of a learning curve, it is.

Bugzilla DB API is, incidentally, one of the first things I looked at when
I got involved with BZ and said to myself "Geez... why didn't they just use
the Perl DBI straight up."

I'm sure I'm not the only one who's asks that.

Out of curiosity, what *was* the reason?

Later,
Paul
  -----------------------------------------------------------------------
  J. Paul Reed                 preed at sigkill.com || web.sigkill.com/preed
  Wait, stop!  We can outsmart those dolphins.  Don't forget: we invented
  computers, leg warmers, bendy straws, peel-and-eat shrimp, the glory
  hole, *and* the pudding cup!  -- Homer Simpson, Tree House of Horror XI