Darren Duncan wrote:
3. Redefine prepare() and execute() such that the first is expressly for
activities that can be done apart from a database (and hence can also be
done for a connection handle that is closed at the time) while all
activities that require database interaction are deferred to
Okay, considering that using the same name prepare() like this may
confuse some people, here is a refined solution that uses 3 methods
instead; please disregard any contrary statements that I previously
made:
# Opt 1: A user that wants the most control can do this (new feature):
my $sth1
Darren Duncan wrote:
Okay, considering that using the same name prepare() like this may
confuse some people, here is a refined solution that uses 3 methods
instead; please disregard any contrary statements that I previously made:
I think I'm beginning to like it.
Allow me to suggest one or tw
HaloO Larry,
you wrote:
On Thu, Jun 30, 2005 at 09:25:10AM +0800, Autrijus Tang wrote:
: Currently, does this:
:
: sub foo (::T $x, ::T $y) { }
:
: and this:
:
: sub foo (T $x, T $y) { }
:
: Means the same thing, namely
:
:a) if the package T is defined in scope, use that as the
Hi,
.assuming is non-mutating on Code objects:
my $subref = &some_sub;
my $assumed_subref = $subref.assuming(:foo);
$subref =:= &some_sub;# true, $subref did not change
Quoting S06:
> The result of a use statement is a (compile-time) object that also
> has an .assuming method,
Larry Wall wrote:
On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 12:37:22PM +0200, "TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)" wrote:
: BTW, is -> on the 'symbolic unary' precedence level
: as its read-only companion \ ?.
No, -> introduces a term that happens to consist of a formal signature
and a block. There are no ordinary expressions
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 05:33:37PM +0200, Ingo Blechschmidt wrote:
: Hi,
:
: .assuming is non-mutating on Code objects:
:
: my $subref = &some_sub;
: my $assumed_subref = $subref.assuming(:foo);
: $subref =:= &some_sub;# true, $subref did not change
I think .assuming implies a
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 07:01:00PM +0200, "TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)" wrote:
: Larry Wall wrote:
: >On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 at 12:37:22PM +0200, "TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)" wrote:
: >: BTW, is -> on the 'symbolic unary' precedence level
: >: as its read-only companion \ ?.
: >
: >No, -> introduces a term that h
On Mon, Jul 04, 2005 at 04:09:59PM +0200, "TSa (Thomas Sandlaß)" wrote:
: I think the point is that using a type variable in the signature of a sub
: is too subtle for recognizing it as a type function that produces typed
: subs. Thus---even if it resembles C++ templates---I suggest to put the
: ty
- support for automatically pulling database DSN information from a
~/.dbi (or similar) file. This is constantly re-invented poorly.
Let's just do a connect by logical application name and let the
SysAdmins sort out which DB that connects to, in a standard way.
This reminds me o
Richard Nuttall wrote:
- support for automatically pulling database DSN information from a
~/.dbi (or similar) file. This is constantly re-invented poorly.
Let's just do a connect by logical application name and let the
SysAdmins sort out which DB that connects to, in a standard
Richard Nuttall wrote:
- support for automatically pulling database DSN information from a
~/.dbi (or similar) file. This is constantly re-invented poorly.
Let's just do a connect by logical application name and let the
SysAdmins sort out which DB that connects to, in a standard wa
Tim et al,
Following are some ideas I have for the new DBI, that were thought
about greatly as I was both working on Rosetta/SQL::Routine and
writing Perl 6 under Pugs. These are all language-independent and
should be implemented at the Parrot-DBI level for all Parrot-hosted
languages to tak
13 matches
Mail list logo
