On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 12:42:44AM +0200, rosenfield.alb...@gmail.com wrote: > > • dependencies > > > > I still think that DBI should be XS, and people should really try > > very very hard to make that work. Pure-perl DBI won't fly. Modules > > and applications that are now depending on DBI do not want to be > > depending on an extra layer, however thin it might be. > > Ah yes, I think we can easily agree that there should not be an extra > layer. Just a proper selection mechanism that imports the best > available module at compile time. > > As it is right now, PurePerl DBI is very hard to use because it doesn't > install, except in cases where XS works (and PurePerl is thus pointless).
I'm curious about the environment you're targeting that doesn't have a compiler. Can you enlighten me? > > DBI is Tim's product, but getting more and more a community effort. > > I bet he'd love your work on getting DBI::PurePerl working [...] > > Tim, what say ye? I'd happily take a patch to Makefile.PL that detects the lack of a C compiler and then alters %opts so WriteMakefile() writes a Makefile that won't try to compile DBI.xs etc etc. Tim.
