On Sun, 2007-08-12 at 18:12 -0400, Mike Meyer wrote:
> You're right, in that the existing mechanisms *can* deal with the
> issues. However, two of the points that comes up over and over again
> here is "use parameters, don't build the query strings yourself" and
> "we would rather the module author
On Sun, 12 Aug 2007 17:05:44 -0400 Carsten Haese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -1. The problem that your proposal is trying to solve doesn't exist. For
> supplying variable values, parameter binding as it is (with the addition
> of making qmark and named mandatory as was decided recently) is
> perf
> As a final note, on backwards compatibility - that was amusing. The
> two sides were trying to define two things with one definition. Let me
> try with two definitions:
>
> A module is backwards compatible if code that used the documented APIs
> of the previous version of the module will work un
On Sun, 2007-08-12 at 13:07 -0400, Mike Meyer wrote:
> I think you just pinpointed the problem: parameter substitution in
> dbapi is being advertised as the solution to a problem it's not really
> adequate to solve.
For the millionth time, it's parameter binding, not parameter
substitution. And it
On Sun, 12 Aug 2007 02:30:45 +0200 Paul Boddie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sunday 12 August 2007 00:33, Mike Meyer wrote:
> > On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 17:10:34 -0400 Carsten Haese <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > The iron-clad, all-encompassing, golden rule is this: If something looks
> >
