Re: DBI drivers by duck-typing

2011-09-21 Thread Greg Sabino Mullane
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: RIPEMD160 I believe that DBI should go away as an actual piece of code and instead be replaced by an API specification document, taking PSGI as inspiration. I'm having a hard time envisioning how this would work in practice. What I see is lots of

Re: DBI drivers by duck-typing

2011-09-21 Thread Darren Duncan
Greg Sabino Mullane wrote: I believe that DBI should go away as an actual piece of code and instead be replaced by an API specification document, taking PSGI as inspiration. I'm having a hard time envisioning how this would work in practice. What I see is lots of duplicated code across the

Re: DBI drivers by duck-typing

2011-09-21 Thread David Nicol
On Wed, Sep 21, 2011 at 7:27 PM, Darren Duncan As for DBMS-specific hacks Another possible approach would be a strict interface that only allows some kind of DBI creole -- well, I suppose a lot of other persistence frameworks are that, pretty much.

Re: DBI drivers by duck-typing

2011-09-13 Thread H.Merijn Brand
On Mon, 12 Sep 2011 19:23:02 -0700, Darren Duncan dar...@darrenduncan.net wrote: Fundamentally I propose an inversion of control, where users invoke DBD modules directly that optionally invoke or compose DBI to help them, rather than users invoking DBI that uses DBD modules to help it.

Re: DBI drivers by duck-typing

2011-09-13 Thread David Nicol
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 2:07 AM, H.Merijn Brand h.m.br...@xs4all.nl wrote: The fact that the DBI is restrictive (or restricted) is a good thing. First of all most of the restrictions are based on well thoughtthrough decisions based on speed and use of resources. I do not have to take those

Re: DBI drivers by duck-typing

2011-09-13 Thread Tim Bunce
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 01:13:58PM -0700, Darren Duncan wrote: To be brief, ... Darren, if you want to do something really directly useful for the DBI ecosystem I would encorage you (or anyone else) to work on creating a DBI test suite that's independent of the DBI distribution. Tim. p.s. I'm

Re: DBI drivers by duck-typing

2011-09-13 Thread Darren Duncan
Tim Bunce wrote: On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 01:13:58PM -0700, Darren Duncan wrote: To be brief, ... Darren, if you want to do something really directly useful for the DBI ecosystem I would encorage you (or anyone else) to work on creating a DBI test suite that's independent of the DBI

DBI drivers by duck-typing

2011-09-12 Thread Darren Duncan
To be brief, ... I don't know if this has come up in past discussions about the next major DBI version, but I'll say it now, since its also what I'm doing with my own DBI-alike ecosystem to be. I believe that DBI should go away as an actual piece of code and instead be replaced by an API

Re: DBI drivers by duck-typing

2011-09-12 Thread Darren Duncan
Replying to myself, ... I believe that this fundamental design change can be accomplished with almost full or entirely backwards-compatibility to existing DBI-using codebases. This partly by a DBI package still being available which essentially provides shims for people saying

Re: DBI drivers by duck-typing

2011-09-12 Thread Darren Duncan
I was sent a response to this off-list, part of which I'll reply to on-list. The response bit was: What happens to the 'which drivers are available' part of the DBI interface? To this I say: The API definition would say that each DBD has something which can be easily scanned for, and so an

Re: DBI drivers by duck-typing

2011-09-12 Thread David Nicol
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Darren Duncan dar...@darrenduncan.net wrote: So what say you? -- Darren Duncan I think you can do this without any change to DBI. You have your own DBI-like framework; you could declare that anything that passes your conformance suite is compliant, and offer

Re: DBI drivers by duck-typing

2011-09-12 Thread Darren Duncan
David Nicol wrote: On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 3:13 PM, Darren Duncan dar...@darrenduncan.net wrote: So what say you? I think you can do this without any change to DBI. You have your own DBI-like framework; you could declare that anything that passes your conformance suite is compliant, and

Re: DBI drivers by duck-typing

2011-09-12 Thread David Nicol
On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Darren Duncan dar...@darrenduncan.net wrote: How mandatory, currently, is the mandatory shared codebase? Are there really traps and snares preventing a different framework from using DBD modules? I'm presuming that there aren't; ICBW. So getting away from the

Re: DBI drivers by duck-typing

2011-09-12 Thread Darren Duncan
David Nicol wrote: On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Darren Duncan dar...@darrenduncan.net wrote: How mandatory, currently, is the mandatory shared codebase? Are there really traps and snares preventing a different framework from using DBD modules? I'm presuming that there aren't; ICBW. So

Re: DBI drivers by duck-typing

2011-09-12 Thread Darren Duncan
David Nicol wrote: Are you asking for something beyond documenting the DBI/DBD interface to the point where a DBD can be used more directly than through the DBI? Aside from requesting that everyone abandon the framework mentality? Are you asking for a stronger set of conventions in DBDs that