On Sun, 19 Jan 2003, John Siracusa wrote: > Okay, but my point was that "standalone use" of db-specific date formatting > and parsing (i.e. in the absence of a $dbh) will be very rare (assuming we > do get it hooked into DBI as proposed). So while it should still certainly > be possible, don't spend too much time sweating over interface "sugar" for > db-specific parsing/formatting.
_If_ the DBD modules incorporate support DateTime, then standalone usage _may_ be rare _after_ such incorporation. I would not necessarily bet on the first happening (it's really up to Tim B, and I have no idea what his position on this would be), nor would I expect adoption of this to be instantaneous, nor would I expect all existing users of such modules to rush out and upgrade just for this. So given all that, the API for standalone use matters, since it'll likely be visible to end users for a non-trivial amount of time! > > He might be a better person than I to start a discussion about this on > > dbi-dev. I'm on that list, so I'll chime in as needed. > > Okay, I'll pursue that. This might be premature. Tim B might not want to talk about vaporware DateTime code (yes, there's stuff in CVS, but it's far from done). -dave /*======================= House Absolute Consulting www.houseabsolute.com =======================*/
