I'd like to see a copy too. Sounds quite a bit like a workaround I was tooling around with in my head. Thanks.
Nick Hendler [EMAIL PROTECTED] _________________________________________ From: Jeff Zucker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Thursday, March 21, 2002 Time: 2:45:41 PM Subject: Use Lib 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? :-) -- Jeff
