Matt S Trout wrote:
> Steven Mackenzie wrote:
>> 'accessor_name' isn't really appropriate becuase the docs state that no
>> actual accessor is created, and you must use ->get_column('<name>'.)
>> Although it would seem sensible to change the behaviour to create the
>> accessor wouldn't it? Is there a reason that no accessor is created at
>> the moment?
>
> Yes, because generating random accessors all over your classes without
> you asking for them would be a horrific bug source.
Spot clashes at compile/load time then it wouldn't be too bad -- after
all you create accessors for all the "real" column names with the same
risk. Accessors are a valuable convenience in the API.
>> Or
>> 'is':
>
> I quite like 'is', actually.
>
But maybe column_key is more explicit/descriptive?'column_key' or 'is' are my preferences, in that order, from the suggestions so far. _______________________________________________ List: http://lists.rawmode.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dbix-class Wiki: http://dbix-class.shadowcatsystems.co.uk/ IRC: irc.perl.org#dbix-class SVN: http://dev.catalyst.perl.org/repos/bast/trunk/DBIx-Class/ Searchable Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
