Hello!
What do you think about adding a new attribute $dbh->{RaiseWarn} which
cause that warnings reported by DBI drivers would behave like errors?
For errors DBI has there $dbh->{PrintError} and $dbh->{RaiseError}
attributes. First one is by default true and second one by default
false. When
Generally speaking, DBI is one of those things where backwards compatibility
should be the highest concern after security. There is a time and place to
break compatibility, and this Print/Raise thing seems way too minor to me for
that. I support the version of this that is
I didn‘t want to start a discussion about deprecation because I know the
opinion about that for most Perl 5 developers.
But strictures and its use in Moo showed that exceptions from warnings aren‘t
welcome.
You can install a warn handler in your code without requiring any change.
Adding
While I'm a staunch opponent of fatal warnings in general, and I believe
Pali has voiced concern with them as well, this is somewhat unrelated as it
has nothing to do with the core warnings pragma and categories, and is
simply an *option* to cause DBI to exhibit different behavior which it
I'm aware of that, semantic versioning and major versions exist to handle API
breakage.
My question is how to detect if an exception is because of a warn or a die when
RaiseWarn is true.
Best regards, Alex
On 2019-01-17 10:53, p...@cpan.org wrote:
> On Thursday 17 January 2019 10:23:25
I don't see the benefit, Print* should die and I'd personally would release a
major release and change the defaults as a breaking change: PrintError false,
RaiseError true.
Can you name a use case and how to differ between an error and a warning at the
error handling side?
Best regards, Alex
On Thursday 17 January 2019 10:23:25 Alexander Hartmaier wrote:
> I don't see the benefit, Print* should die
This would break existing API of DBI. Print just prints and Raise dies.
This cannot be changed as there are many applications which depends on
this API.
> and I'd personally would release
On Thursday 17 January 2019 11:06:22 Alexander Hartmaier wrote:
> I'm aware of that, semantic versioning and major versions exist to handle API
> breakage.
Such thing is unsupported by CPAN clients. So we cannot use it.
Anyway, this is question for Tim as DBI maintainer. But I guess he does
not
Personally I do not like changing Print/Raise. It is documented,
implementation seems to match documentation, it is without bugs and
current behavior is usable.
Anyway, back to my question about RaiseWarn. Do you think that it make
sense to have it in DBI?
On Thursday 17 January 2019 11:02:51
