On 04.06.2010 15:41, Dave Rolsky wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jun 2010, Alexander Foken wrote:
That's why I proposed to switch to DBD::ODBC: It is well tested and
supports Unicode as good as the ODBC driver does.
And as I said in private email, that's not really feasible for us.
Yes, it would cause you a lot of work, starting by distributing an ODBC
manager and an ODBC driver. Perhaps too much work. Think of it as a last
resort.
But for patching Unicode support into DBD::Sybase, DBD::ODBC could be
helpful, both by showing how to patch DBD::Sybase, and by providing a
Unicode-aware way to the database on the development machine.
Now you "just" need to find someone who is willing and has the time
to patch DBD::Sybase ... ;-)
Which is why I'm hoping we can pay Michael to work on this.
Throwing money at the problem is definitly a good idea! And it would be
great if that work would end on CPAN (and not in a secret private branch).
Clearly, he's the most qualified.
Otherwise, I might have to do this, which is a scary thought.
Well, I also was scared by DBD::ODBC, and I must admit that I still
don't understand all of it. I'm still happy that MJE took over the
stalled DBD::ODBC development and improved my patch (and many other
parts of DBD::ODBC).
A first step to patching DBD::Sybase would be like my first step with
DBD::ODBC: Just make binding input parameters and fetching results work
with Unicode. Don't care about Unicode in the SQL statement (use
placeholders, so you don't need Unicode there), don't care about binding
output parameters, connect strings, user names, passwords, private
functions. "Steal" the Unicode tests from DBD::ODBC and make DBD::Sybase
pass those tests without breaking the existing tests.
Alexander
--
Alexander Foken
mailto:alexan...@foken.de http://www.foken.de/alexander/
