Carsten Haese wrote: > On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 10:20, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: >> Carsten Haese wrote: >>> On Wed, 2006-04-19 at 08:24, M.-A. Lemburg wrote: >>>> I've found the qmark style to be sufficient for everything >>> I agree. Considering that many modules already support qmark, and those >>> that currently use 'format'/'pyformat' would have to move to something >>> else if these are dropped, I'd like to suggest that supporting 'qmark' >>> style should become a required feature. Modules would be free to also >>> implement 'named' and/or 'numeric', but supporting 'qmark' should be >>> mandatory. >> I'm not sure whether that's easily possible for database modules >> which rely on different marker mechanisms, e.g. some modules >> probably use the implicit type information in the pyformat style >> to find out which method to use for binding variables. > > I don't follow. I thought we're voting on dropping 'pyformat' as a > parameter style. Also, how does pyformat contain implicit type > information?
Markers such as %i and %s could be treated as meaning: bind these variables as integer and string. This implicit type information might be vital to some modules. -- Marc-Andre Lemburg eGenix.com Professional Python Services directly from the Source (#1, Apr 19 2006) >>> Python/Zope Consulting and Support ... http://www.egenix.com/ >>> mxODBC.Zope.Database.Adapter ... http://zope.egenix.com/ >>> mxODBC, mxDateTime, mxTextTools ... http://python.egenix.com/ ________________________________________________________________________ ::: Try mxODBC.Zope.DA for Windows,Linux,Solaris,FreeBSD for free ! :::: _______________________________________________ DB-SIG maillist - DB-SIG@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/db-sig
