Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from March 2000
At 08:59 AM 3/20/00 -0600, Greg Bacon wrote:
>In message <MailDrop1.2d7j-PPC.1000320012616@perlfaq.com>,
> "Joseph N. Hall" writes:
>
>: You p5p-ers may or may not understand the significance and popularity of
>: SQL and Perl but from my contact with the real world, it's headed toward
>: "huge." A few syntactical nods in its direction will likely make Perl
>: many new friends a year or two down the road.
>
>I've only used DBI (as opposed to, say, Pro*C and friends) when talking
>to databases, so I have no idea what outsiders might want or expect
>(though reading people's code in *.pc makes me see that particular
>implementation as being rigid and inflexible).
I've used both. (As well as Pro*COBOL, though I don't like admitting that
in public... :)
Embedded SQL is, without a doubt, terribly rigid and not particularly
pleasant or perlish. On the other hand, at one point (the point where I was
using Oracle regularly) I'd have killed, or at least given really nasty
paper cuts, for it as a way to wean folks off of C. (It's amazing how many
people write reports, including financial reports, in C. It's got to be one
of the *least* suitable languages for that sort of thing...)
A qs (which I'd document as "quote special" rather than "quote SQL" that
did some sort of function call would be great. If this:
qs(select foo from bar where baz = $xyzzy);
got translated into:
QS("select foo from bar where baz = ?", [{NAME => '$xyzzy',
REFERENCE => \$xyzzy,
TYPE => 'SCALAR'}]);
or something similar, would be really nice. Heck, the replacement character
could be a null, or *something*, who cares what.
Dan
--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski even samurai
dan@sidhe.org have teddy bears and even
teddy bears get drunk