Re: Table base class for DBD::File Co
Sorry for the delay replying, and the top-post.
All sounds good. Thanks!
Tim.
On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 10:28:29AM +, Jens Rehsack wrote:
Hi Tim, hi DBI developers,
inspired by the issues reported against DBD::DBM and SQL::Statement
regarding Test-Database, I checked SQL::Statement, DBD::File and
DBD::DBM to figure out where it fails.
I found several bugs which are fixed for now (even if I wouldn't
tend to release this time). I'd like to get your opinion about
following two changes:
1) Introduce a DBI::SQL::Nano::Table, deriving either from
SQL::Eval::Table or DBI::SQL::Nano::Table_ - like
DBI::SQL::Nano::Statement does.
Derive DBD::File::Table from DBI::SQL::Nano::Table.
2) Add 2 additional tests (naming proposals) which test DBD::DBM
and DBD::Gofer using SQL::Statement, if available.
To be honest, I would let the 2 new tests use
$ENV{DBI_SQL_NANO} = 1 and remove this line from t/50dbm.t
and t/85gofer.t
The tests could be named t/zqs_$1
Following changes are planned to do before next DBI release:
- Synchronize DBD::DBM::Statement and DBD::DBM::Table with DBD::File
classes
- allow case insensitive table - file mapping for tables without
(might need flags for the statement instance)
Jens
Re: Table base class for DBD::File Co
On 05/10/10 21:00, Tim Bunce wrote: On Thu, May 06, 2010 at 10:28:29AM +, Jens Rehsack wrote: Hi Tim, hi DBI developers, inspired by the issues reported against DBD::DBM and SQL::Statement regarding Test-Database, I checked SQL::Statement, DBD::File and DBD::DBM to figure out where it fails. [...] Sorry for the delay replying, and the top-post. Most questions you answered in IRC (remember, I'm Sno| (workstation) or [Sno] (Laptop) there). Looks if you're still under water :( I'll try to get most things done this week - I'd like to get it out as soon as possible, because Test::Database quirks on the bugs and we must coordinate SQL::Statement and DBI releases. It would be nice to also get coverage of the nano + DBI::PurePerl case. Sure - as I proposed/asked yesterday in a private mail :) I'll think a bit over it - how to do it best. I even miss some tests for DBD::DBM (I detected potential issues with DBI::SQL::Nano when updating or deleting several lines with one matching WHERE clause - and maybe SQL::Statement leads into similar problems, even if I hope to have them fixed). Then some additional tests for DBD::DBM could be done in case SQL::Statement is found (e.g. joining, aggregation tests, ...) All sounds good. Thanks! \o/ Jens
