* Tim Bunce <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2004-12-01 10:47]:
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 10:40:34PM +0000, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 10:32:12PM +0000, Tim Bunce wrote:
> > > On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 09:38:47PM +0000, Nicholas Clark wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 08:53:51PM +0000, Tim Bunce wrote:
> > > It seems to me that the problem is of your own making.
> > > Why have separate hash elements for all these things in the
> > > first place?
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > I guess I don't find it natural thinking about parameters as
> > a single string.
>
> Do you generally pass URLs around as a string or broken up into
> a hash?
Funny, that's the other case where I wish there were more
adequate APIs for manipulation. I generally pass around URI
objects in my own code, and I use a couple utility functions to
de-/compose them more easily.
File::Spec feels much less awkward most of the time, but I still
occasionally wish for more.
I can definitely see where Terrence is going with his module
here.
Personally I'd prefer if DBI outlined a couple of names that are
(strongly) suggested to DBD authors for the common DSN parameters
and accepted a hash for the DS definition out of the box. It
shouldn't be necessary for this to be implemented in a separate
module.
Regards,
--
#Aristotle
*AUTOLOAD=*_;sub _{s/(.*)::(.*)/print$2,(",$\/"," ")[defined wantarray]/e;$1}
&Just->another->Perl->hacker;
