Using DBI

[Jonathan Schatz]

On Fri, 2003-01-17 at 06:12, Bradley Baetz wrote:
> A quick summary:
> 
> - Don't use SendSQL (or {Push,Pop}GlobalSQLState/MoreSQLData/etc. They
> won't work w/o SendSQL anyway)
> 
> - Use the DBI helper functions. They're easier to write, clearer to
> understand, and some of them are written in XS (ie C) which makes them
> faster. (Postgres doesn't use the C version, and you must have compiled
> your DBD:: driver _after_ installing the updated DBI for the C version
> to be used)

does there exist the possibility of keeping the old *SQL functions
working by changing them to use DBI? i didn't know this was coming, and
you've magically added an extra week's worth of work to my current
project. 

i'd write this if there is any interest. i personally find DBI to be
extremely ugly and generally write wrapper classes around it. in fact, i
don't think i've ever (professionally) used DBI without some kind of
abstraction level.

while i agree that the bugzilla sql subs were ugly, i'm seriously
dreading a rewrite of the code i've got. is anyone else in this same
situation?

-jon
-- 
Jonathan Schatz
Engineering System Administrator
VMware, Inc
"Te occidere possunt sed te edere non possunt nefas est."