Re[2]: [Dbi-interbase-devel] 0.21 alpha released

[Michael S. <mi...@ch...>]

Hello Mark,

Saturday, September 09, 2000, 6:35:18 PM, you wrote:

MDA> i  don't think it should be called "tr", to distinguish it from a
MDA> transaction  handle  --  these  are  just transaction parameters.
MDA> could be "TransParams" or something.

That definitely would be better. My suggestion was only draft.

>> $tr = $dbh->begin(\%params).
MDA> there will always be other options, and for symmetry, i think this should be:
MDA> begin({TransParams => \%params});

Very reasonable, too.

>> This  transaction  object  has  the  same  methods  as  $dbh has, i.e.
>> prepare, execute, selectrow_array and others.

MDA> What I would like is for the methods to all support a {Trans => $tr} or {TransParams => $string}
or {TransParams =>> $hash} in their options argument.
MDA> In other words, i don't see a need to make the transaction handle also be
MDA> an object with methods, though I suppose it couldn't hurt.

This simply didn't cross my mind, but $tr->commit is more elegant, I
hope,   than  $dbh->commit(Trans  =>  $tr),  so  $tr->prepare(...)
looks  slightly  shorter and clearer than $dbh->prepare(..., {Trans =>
$tr}).

BTW,  it  $dbh  and  $sth  seem  to  have  the  method or the property
returning   the   current   transaction.   Smth   like   $dbh->tr   or
$dbh->{Trans}.

The  one  issue  else:  what  must  we  do  with  transaction  on it's
destroying?  If  it's  enough  just  commit  or  rollback,  maybe  the
parameter named, say, AutoCommit will be useful.

MDA> You actually have two proposals above -- one on how to specify parameters,
MDA> and one on how to change the api.

Thank you, your words sound like nectar and ambrosia taste :-)

MDA> Both seem fine to me, but in the end it is Edwin who rules....

I don't think anybody will refuse the working improvements :-)

Best regards,
 Michael                            mailto:mi...@ch...