Re^2: Tie::DBI vs Class::DBI

I suspect Class::DBI will be around for quite a bit longer than you think. No need to spread FUD about it's demize. There is a huge community built up around it, and lots of development still happening in the plugin space. There are still a few shortcomings in the core code, but the code is very stable and used in production all over the place. And despite the issues witnessed last month, I'm sure a new version will come out.

On the other hand, DBIx::Class seems to still be in the experimental stages AFAIK. And the fact that it is entirely based on Multiple Inheritance magic using @ISA tricks gives me the willies... That is personal opinion, and does not necesarily mean DBIx::Class is crap, but is something to keep in mind!

Comment on Re^2: Tie::DBI vs Class::DBI

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^3: Tie::DBI vs Class::DBI
by Anonymous Monk on Aug 20, 2005 at 20:45 UTC

@ISA "tricks"? DBIC provides some shortcuts to save you typing over use base qw/.../; but there's absolutely no requirement to do that. Nice but optional syntactic sugar is a good thing surely, no?

DBIx::Class also has a Class::DBI compat layer which can pass the vast majority of the Class::DBI test suite, and a fair number of its own. It's still pretty new, but well worth considering for new projects - and we tend to operate the "submit a failing test case and it'll happen" principle for feature requests. It's also going to be able to support a lot of features Class::DBI simply won't (I went about as far as I could with my work on Class::DBI::Sweet).

If you need total stability above all else, use Class::DBI for sure - but if you're more interested in an actively developed project with an open process and a growing community, or want the greatest potential future feature set, DBIx::Class is definitely worth evaluating.

- Matt S Trout, DBIx::Class project founder

[reply]


Welcome to the Monastery
	PerlMonks