On Fri, 31 Mar 2006, Carl Franks wrote:
>
> I agree that using exceptions is a Good Thing, however I think there's
> some problems here.
>
> On 30/03/06, Mark Hedges <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > I never know what I'm doing wrong. I just get an undefined value
> > from methods. Was nothing found? Is the relation broken? Where
> > did it break? I do things in eval { } and I get no $EVAL_ERROR.
>
> I don't think a database returning an empty result should throw an
> exception, so checking for undef seems reasonable to me.
> Adding an option to make an empty result be fatal might be possible, I
> certainly wouldn't want it as the default behaviour.
The trouble is when I want to do $one->two->three->four and two
or three returns as undef because there is no value, then it
bombs. An option would be nice.
> I use DBI's RaiseError setting, so if there's an sql error, it dies.
> If there's a broken relation, but it's valid sql and returns an empty
> result, how's dbix-class supposed to know the relation is broken?
You're right, after fixing the relationship it worked, and I got
the right thing. It was just that development process that
seemed harder than it needed to be.
Mark
_______________________________________________
List: http://lists.rawmode.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class
Wiki: http://dbix-class.shadowcatsystems.co.uk/
IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class
SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/trunk/DBIx-Class/
