On Feb 4, 2005, at 2:08 AM, Tim Bunce wrote:

One way I'd had in the back of my mind way to use the DBI dispatcher
to fire the callbacks.

$h->{Callbacks}->{$method_name} = \&foo; # called on entry
$h->{Callbacks}->{$method_name} = [ \&foo, \&bar ]; # foo on entry, bar on exit
$h->{Callbacks}->{$method_name} = [ [EMAIL PROTECTED], \&bar ]; # each of @subrefs on entry, bar on exit

that way _every_ method would get pre and post call hooks for free.
If a handle has no callbacks the cost would be unmeasurable (just
a bit flag test in the dispatcher).  If a handle has any callbacks
then the added cost for calling a method that doesn't have a callback
would just be one hash lookup.

Ah, yes, that sounds really nice.

How's your C coding? :)

I gave up when I got to my first malloc. Sorry, I'm JAPH. I can help with the Perl code, though!

This approach doesn't directly support callbacks that need to fire
_within_ a method, such as the proposed OnConnectCached firing only
if connect_cached() does _not_ need to call connect().

[For that case you could have an pre-connect_cached callback that
temporarily installs a connect callback which sets a flag, and a
post-connect_cached callback that resets %$attr if the flag's not set.
But that's getting quite baroque!]

Yah, my NoReset solution is starting to look better. Maybe the get_child() stuff should take priority?

Alternatively connect_cached() could call a new method in that
situation and the hooks could be applied to that. But that's
relatively expensive and it would be 'odd' for that method to be
called with the $attr that was passed to connect_cached().

Alternatively some pseudo-method-names could be supported in the
$h->{Callbacks} hash (ie "connect_cached.reused") and the relevant
methods could check for and call them directly. Then the extra code
in connect_cached would something like this:

  if (my $cb = $dbh->{Callbacks}) {
      my $oc = $cb->{"connect_cached.reused"};
      $oc->($dbh, $dsn, $user, $pass, $attr) if ref $oc eq 'CODE';
  }

Umm, food for thought...

That's starting to get might complex, isn't it?

Regards,

David

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature



Reply via email to