On 11 Jan 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Jan 11, 2007, at 3:54 PM, John Siracusa wrote:
> >
> > If so, let's go with "Debug" instead of "Debugging". I picked
> > "Debugging"
> > before because I didn't want any confusion with the various $Debug
> > package
> > variables, but if everythin
On Jan 11, 2007, at 3:54 PM, John Siracusa wrote:
>
> If so, let's go with "Debug" instead of "Debugging". I picked
> "Debugging"
> before because I didn't want any confusion with the various $Debug
> package
> variables, but if everything's going to be in ::Debug::*, then
> that's not an
>
On 1/11/07 3:49 PM, Jonathan Vanasco wrote:
> i'm going to structure it like this:
>
> Rose::DB::Object::Debugging base namespace (empty)
> Rose::DB::Object::Debugging::Helpers mixin objects for debugging
If so, let's go with "Debug" instead of "Debugging". I picked "Debugging"
before beca
On Jan 11, 2007, at 3:13 PM, John Siracusa wrote:
> Helpers are pretty wide-open, so don't ask, just write it :) If it
> really
> is solely for debugging, however, I think a
> Rose::DB::Object::Debugging
> module would a nice. It'd be the same thing as Helpers (import
> methods
> under op
On 1/11/07 3:04 PM, Jonathan Vanasco wrote:
> first off- i'd be willing to write this one.
Helpers are pretty wide-open, so don't ask, just write it :) If it really
is solely for debugging, however, I think a Rose::DB::Object::Debugging
module would a nice. It'd be the same thing as Helpers (imp
first off- i'd be willing to write this one.
i'd like to see something like this for debugging:
$rodbObject->status();
that outputs:
===
This object IS in synch with the last known DB version | This
object IS NOT in synch with the last DB version
fieldname | object_value |
