On Thu, Mar 21, 2002 at 11:45:41AM -0800, Jeff Zucker wrote:
> Bart Lateur wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, 20 Mar 2002 18:16:39 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > 
> > >DBI is just being untarred and put in the modules dir.  No make or
> > >anything like that.  It's for a program that will run on
> > >Linux/Unix/Windows and I don't want to have to require the compiling
> > >or installation of DBI with the program.
> > >
> > >It may be hopeless...
> > 
> > It is.
> > 
> > You might get by by precompiling the module for each platform you want
> > to support, tar up that tree, and distribute that. Pretty much like how
> > modules for Windows get distributed...
> 
> I hesitate to suggest this. TIM, please tell me if this is too evil to
> see the light of day:
> 
> I have a module which might be called DBI::Lite (or ... DBI::Emulation
> or AnyData::DBI::Lite or ?) which provides a DBI emulation in pure
> perl.  Basically, you'd need DBD::AnyData, SQL::Statement, and DBI::Lite
> (all pure perl, no compilation required) and you could use
> do(),prepare(),execute(),fetch() and a few other features including
> placeholders.  The module would work exactly like DBD:AnyData and very
> similarly to DBD::CSV but would not require installation of DBI.  Once
> DBI is installed, the scripts would operate identically with a change of
> "use DBI::Lite;" to "use DBI;".  Most users would be better off going
> straight to real DBI but in a case like Nick's it would save making
> compiled versions for multiple platforms.
> 
> So, Tim, which namespace, or shall I keep it in the Dev::Null namespace?
> :-)

Send me a copy :)

Tim.

Reply via email to