On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 20:00:06 +0300
Antony Dovgal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi, all.
>
> I'm going to rename functions from oci8 to match the naming-conventions.
> Old names will be kept as aliases, of course, but should be deprecated.
> Imho these changes will make OCI extsension more handy an
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 08:13:13 +0100
Markus Fischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 08:00:06PM +0300, Antony Dovgal wrote :
> > ocifetchinto -- this is a special case. I'd prefer to make 3 functions
> > instead of it: oci_fetch_row, oci_fetch_array & oci_fetch_assoc
>
> Ju
On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 08:00:06PM +0300, Antony Dovgal wrote :
> ocifetchinto -- this is a special case. I'd prefer to make 3 functions
> instead of it: oci_fetch_row, oci_fetch_array & oci_fetch_assoc
Just curious; there are other extension which provide
*fetch_object() too. Did you lea
On Wed, 2003-12-17 at 18:00, Antony Dovgal wrote:
> Hi, all.
>
> I'm going to rename functions from oci8 to match the naming-conventions.
> Old names will be kept as aliases, of course, but should be deprecated.
> Imho these changes will make OCI extsension more handy and it's API more similar to
Hi, all.
I'm going to rename functions from oci8 to match the naming-conventions.
Old names will be kept as aliases, of course, but should be deprecated.
Imho these changes will make OCI extsension more handy and it's API more similar to
other extensions' API.
I'd like to hear your opinions about
