On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Hardy Merrill wrote: > Bart Lateur [[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: > > On Fri, 4 Jan 2002 14:01:05 +0000, Tim Bunce wrote: > > > > >On Thu, Jan 03, 2002 at 01:25:03AM +0000, Tim Bunce wrote: > > >> Here's what I'm thinking, and developing, at the moment... > > >> [Please read and think about it all before commenting] > > > > > >Umm, a stunned silence, apathy, confusion, new year hang-over?
Drat. I missed the post. Probably hangover and a holiday backlog of email, because I'm always watching for Tim's posts. Can I get a copy or find it online? > > >Should I just take the silence as general acceptance that it's a good idea? Ha. Haven't you ever made some bonehead post which the world was kind enough to ignore? > I'm not trying to be a pain in the a__, but I would really > appreciate a "primer" on "How Subclassing DBI.pm can benefit you" > directed at people who haven't subclassed the DBI.pm before. > Does something like this already exist? If I understood it > and knew more about it, I might have more input on how much > the proposed enhancements make sense(or not). Me too. As a user of DBI I also haven't felt a need to subclass DBI.pm. Not being familiar with DBIx::AnyDBD my opinion may not count for much. rob Live the dream.
