On Thu, 6 Nov 2008 08:50:31 +0100 "Dami Laurent (PJ)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For info : the latest revision of SQLA1.50 > (http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/svnweb/bast/browse/SQL-Abstract/1.x/branch > es/1.50_RC/) > together with the DBIC patch from mendel (http://scsys.co.uk:8001/20236) > fixes most problems. Hi, I've got an idea, but maybe I'm wrong: shouldn't we pass through blessed objects in bind values unmodified (ie. without stringification)? That way the user of SQLA can still decide what to do with them - in my opinion the responsibility of SQLA is just to assemble the SQL string and data structure that holds the bind values, but not converting the bind values (unless it's absolutely necessary). My proposed patch did pass them through, and it passed all tests, but now yours explicity stringifies them (and SQLA explodes if such an object is passed that has no stringification overload). I don't insist on my approach, just wanted to make sure that there are valid reasons why we should sacrifice flexibility. norbi _______________________________________________ List: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/DBIx-Class/ Searchable Archive: http://www.grokbase.com/group/[email protected]
