On Sat, Feb 26, 2011 at 6:22 AM, John M. Dlugosz <[email protected]>wrote:
> On 2/25/2011 9:30 AM, Ashley Pond V apv-at-sedition.com |Catalyst/Allow > to home| wrote: > >> What t0m suggested is perfectly fine but if you want to mimic the DBIC >> API with a different engine, this example does that (superficially and >> as a tutorial only): http://sedition.com/a/2739 Log file model–Apache >> access log. The reason that example makes sense is because the >> underlying model/data is similar: searchable, sortable rows. If you're >> trying to shoehorn in something dissimilar, you might be making a >> mistake. >> >> -Ashley >> > I'm not sure to what extent it is wise or correct. > The whole point of "models" is that it abstracts the model and I can change > where the data comes from later, right? So don't they all have an > underlying abstract interface regardless of how they are sourced? > The only abstraction Catalyst::Model provides is initialization. Personally I don't like this approach but I cannot imagine what common abstraction it could provide for so diverse models. Some Catalyst::Model::xxx classes do provide some additional functionality - like Catalyst::Model::DBIC which adds the possibility to address the resutlsets with a shortcut - but it's their own unique additions. -- Zbigniew Lukasiak http://brudnopis.blogspot.com/ http://perlalchemy.blogspot.com/
_______________________________________________ List: [email protected] Listinfo: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/catalyst Searchable archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Dev site: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/
