Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

btilly (5037)

btilly
  (email not shown publicly)

Journal of btilly (5037)

Thursday June 07, 2007
07:22 PM

What does DBD::Pg not liked named parameters?

[ #33466 ]

At $work I'm getting a few basic tools set up. Since we use PostgreSQL, I'm using DBD::Pg. With DBD::Oracle I grew to like some of the more flexible ways of entering parameters, so I look for that in DBD::Pg. I find that there are three options.

1. The DBI standard ?. If I was happy with that, I wouldn't be reading this documentation.

2. They allow positional parameters with $1, $2, $3. Given that this is inside of Perl, I'm going to constantly be wondering whether I'm accidentally interpolating in variables. Better than ? but I don't really like the syntax. The visual disambiguation from variable interpolation was a reason to prefer DBD::Oracle's :1, :2 and so on.

3. They support full named parameters. :foo. :bar. Yay! I like it! But they go on to say, While this syntax is supported by DBD::Pg, its use is highly discouraged.

Huh? Does anyone know why they discourage the cleanest and most flexible solution? Personally whenever I get the chance to work by name rather than by position, I jump at the opportunity. But I'm somewhat reluctant to use a feature that the software authors don't want me to use without knowing the reason for that dislike...

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.