On Mon, Jul 01, 2002 at 02:51:11PM +0200, Bart Lateur wrote: > On Mon, 1 Jul 2002 12:18:31 +0100, Tim Bunce wrote: > > >> >I'll probably rename finish() to something like discard_unfetched_rows(). > >> >(Keeping an alias for old code of course.) > >> > >> I guess I got the idea from this sentence in perldoc DBI: > >> > >> The `finish' method should have been called `cancel_select'. > > > >I keep changing what I want to rename it to - which is why I haven't > >renamed it yet :) > > > >I think discard_unfetched_rows is the most descriptive and least > >ambiguous one I've come up with yet. > > Yet is't a horribly long name. Why don't you change "connect" into > "connect_to_database", "prepare" into "prepare_statement" and "do" into > "prepare_and_execute_statement"?
Huffman coding. Lots of code uses do() - very little code should use discard_unfetched_rows(). > You should choose something short and sweet for a name. Something like > "discard". Which doesn't, at least to me, ring the same bell as > "cancel". > > "no_more" or "enough_already" both consist of two words, which makes > them less than ideal. "thanks"? These all sound like jokes (which they > are, really). :-) Tim.
