On Tue, 5 Sep 2000 10:48:45 +0200, dLux wrote:
>/--- On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 07:18:56PM -0500, Greg Rollins wrote:
>| Will perl monitor the commit and rollback actions of transactions?
>\---
>
>What exactly you mean?
And did you have to quote 500+ lines of the RFC just to add this one
sentence?
/--- On Mon, Sep 04, 2000 at 07:18:56PM -0500, Greg Rollins wrote:
| Will perl monitor the commit and rollback actions of transactions?
\---
What exactly you mean?
dLux
--
This message is READ-ONLY
Will perl monitor the commit and rollback actions of transactions?
- Original Message -
From: "Perl6 RFC Librarian" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, September 04, 2000 4:35 PM
Subject: RFC 130 (v5) Transaction
dLux wrote:
>
>
> Thanks guys, you convinced me this is not a dead thing.
>
> I got some suggestion (2 phase commit support, DBI integration,
> other data source integration) from Glenn Linderman. I will improve
> this RFC with those things.
I might have mentioned this before, but I t
/--- On Wed, Aug 23, 2000 at 03:49:02PM -0400, David Corbin wrote:
| I think it would be a good thing, and would be another things can
| distinguish Perl from the other languages like pattern matching
| once
| did. It strikes me as one of those things that are going to end up
| adding a whol
dLux wrote:
>
> Hello!
>
> I've posted an RFC about transaction-enabled variables (RFC130:
> http://dev.perl.org/rfc/130.pod), but I didn't get too much response
> about that. Does anyone have comment about that? I want to clarify
> the language p
dLux wrote:
>
> I've posted an RFC about transaction-enabled variables (RFC130:
> http://dev.perl.org/rfc/130.pod), but I didn't get too much response
I think the RFC looks fine. This would be nice thing for perl to have.
--
John Porter
From: "dLux" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 23, 2000 7:32 AM
Subject: transaction-enabled variables
> I've posted an RFC about transaction-enabled variables (RFC130:
> http://dev.perl.org/rfc/130.pod), but I didn't get too much response
Hello!
I've posted an RFC about transaction-enabled variables (RFC130:
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/130.pod), but I didn't get too much response
about that. Does anyone have comment about that? I want to clarify
the language part of that (new keyword, new pragma), and if i
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Transaction-enabled variables for Perl6
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Szabó, Balázs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 17 Aug 2000
Last Modified: 19 Aug 2000
Version: 3
Mailing List: [EMAIL PRO
This and other RFCs are available on the web at
http://dev.perl.org/rfc/
=head1 TITLE
Transaction-enabled variables for Perl6
=head1 VERSION
Maintainer: Szabó, Balázs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 17 Aug 2000
Last Modified: 18 Aug 2000
Version: 2
Mailing List: [EMAIL PRO
11 matches
Mail list logo
