On Tue, 03 Aug 2004 09:35:25 +0200, Jochen Wiedmann > That gains absolutely *no* functionality
It's a heck of a lot easier to subclass... > for the burden of loosing compatibility. There's no reason the old interface couldn't continue to exist. > Besides, we obviously have different feelings, what's "Perl-ish" or not. Sorry, maybe I should have said "post-Perl-4-ish" ;) On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 10:37:57 +0100, Tim Bunce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 07:56:47PM -0400, John Siracusa wrote: > > Maybe this is DBI 3.0 I'm talking about, or maybe I'll forever be doomed to > > implement DBI wrapper after DBI wrapper, but I thought I'd give it a shot :) > > It is indeed DBI 3.0 that you're talking about. I'm thinking of DBI v3 > as the version that'll be re-engineered with a perl6 API. Though in > practice it may work out that DBI v3 is a 'plain' port to perl6 and > it's DBI v4 that gets an API makeover. But that's all some way off yet. A "plain" port of the current DBI interface to Perl 6 would be a sin against nature, IMO. Ick :) > Meanwhile, now isn't the time to be getting into debates about such > future details. Ah well... -John
