isn't there just an in-memory adapter sans sqlite3?

On Sat, Oct 10, 2009 at 11:21 AM, Ashley Moran <
[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> On 9 Oct 2009, at 13:41, Jacques Crocker wrote:
>
> > My retarded solution...  use DataMapper::Resource and just create the
> > tables but don't use them (call valid? but not save).
> >
> > Someone has to have a better solution than this though. Anyone?
>
> Hmmm, that's far from ideal.  I don't understand why creating a
> SQLite3 in-memory adapter doesn't work. Did you auto-migrate it?  You
> could possibly even have the Model.automigrate! call at the end of the
> file, to catch it with code reloading, if you're doing a web project.
>
> But it seems to me a bug that you can't make a new resource in memory
> without the storage existing.  It seems to me there are two levels to
> this:
>
> * there should be a NullAdapter to workaround it
>
> * DataMapper should just not check for the storage
>
> So is this a bug?  If so I will file a ticket.
>
> Ashley
>
> --
> http://www.patchspace.co.uk/
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/ashleymoran
> http://aviewfromafar.net/
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >
>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"DataMapper" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/datamapper?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to