On Thu, 16 Jan 2003, David Wheeler wrote: > > Your first option is not on the table. The options on the table are: > > > > use DateTime; > > use DateTime::Parse::MySQL; > > my $dt = DateTime->from_mysql_datetime( $mysql_dt ); > > print $dt->to_mysql_string(); > > > > or > > > > use DateTime; > > use DateTime::Parse::MySQL; > > my $dt = DateTime::Parse::MySQL->new_datetime( $mysql_dt ); > > print DateTime::Parse::MySQL->mysql_datetime( $dt ); > > > > Frankly, I think the first one is a lot easier to use and makes more > > sense. It's the decorator pattern without the dispatching overhead! > > Trying to catch up here a bit. It seems to me that the first option > could just be a pass-through to the second.
I think #1 is off the table. A few people liked it (including me), but several were quite vehemently opposed to it. I'll probably just go with the very straightforward API of: make a parsing object tell it to parse string X and return a DateTime make a formatting object tell it to format a DateTime object in a specific format This isn't particularly clever, nor is it super-convenient. But all the clever and convenient suggestions seem to arouse more dislike from some people, so it's easier to agree on the tried and true. It might not be ideal for anyone, but at least people who look at the modules will not be turned off by an API they consider to abnormal ;) -dave /*======================= House Absolute Consulting www.houseabsolute.com =======================*/
