Perrin,
I look forward to seeing your paper!
In particular I find I am doing the same things over and over again. I keep thinking, wouldn't it be cool if I could easily relate this 'hash' or this 'array of hashes' to a DB table.
Just recently I have seen some quite specific modules, such as hash2table and table2hash, they look fine, as far as they go, but I think I am looking for some greater level of abstraction. For example the ability to easily manage complex data-structures, for storing the state of a complex state machine, or for storing configuration hashes or arrays which might be quite variable in nature. In one application I have mappings of fields in an import file realting them to a database table. It is two arrays, now, how about an easy interface to save an array of arrays in a named structure and save them in the db. Of course, the arrays are both the same size, but they could be as small as 2 values each or as many as 40 to 50. I just want them back the same way I had them before.
I know I can do some of this using a CONFIG module, but I am hoping that I don't have to write some sort of kludge around a CONFIG module when a DBI wrapper of some sort might be easier to handle and more usable for me.
Make sense?
jdtoronto | [reply] |
You could look at Tie::DBI. I don't know much about the rest of the "easy DBI" modules.
| [reply] |
They mostly fall into two camps: tools to make simple DBI actions simpler, at the expense of performance
Of course, the exception to this largely true generalization would be PApp::SQL which is coded in XS for speed, but is a snap to use as well.
Carter's compass: I know I'm on the right track when by deleting something, I'm adding functionality
| [reply] |