On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 12:31:23PM +0000, Tim Bunce wrote: > On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 07:21:56PM +1100, Peter Rabbitson wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:59:46PM +0000, Tim Bunce wrote: > > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 09:40:07PM +1100, Peter Rabbitson wrote: > > > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:17:11AM +0000, Tim Bunce wrote: > > > > > Re https://rt.cpan.org/Public/Bug/Display.html?id=82942 > > > > > > > > > > The key question: is this a bug or a feature? > > > > > > > > Can you walk me through your thought process on what makes this a > > > > feature? > > > > Not trying to be difficult, I am just having trouble seeing the > > > > use-case ;) > > > > > > A cache statement is cached because the user asked for it to be cached. > > > > Perhaps there is a mismatch of understanding here. For me the only > > benefit of using a cached statement is to avoid a prepare. Executing the > > *same* statement with the *same* values *without* rebind does not seem > > to be possible in the first place (according to the docs at least): > > I don't follow you here Peter. This should work fine: > > $sth = $dbh->prepare_cached($sql); > $sth->bind_param(1, $foo); > $sth->execute(); > $sth->execute(); > $sth->execute(); > $sth->execute();
I was not aware this is even possible. I rescanned the docs - nothing seeems to claim it is. In any case - now we are on the same page, and the entanglement seems to be the only way forward. I saw you already stalled the ticket - keep it so. > > > Bound values are meant to persist across finish(), so there are still > > > risks. > > > > Also undocumented ;) > > Bound values are spec'd to persist in general. No need to mention finish(). I keep thinking I am overlooking something. I will look at things again later tonight.
