[Dbix-class] Listing of many_to_many relations (ResultSet reflection)

[Matt S Trout]

On 31 Jan 2007, at 10:44, Zbigniew Lukasiak wrote:

>>
>> Neither of these are acceptable; please review the IRC logs where I
>> explained the design constraints involved.
>
> I can only see you mentioned Moose as the future basis of DBIC.  I
> need to admit I don't see how this is in contradiction with any of
> those proposals - even if I do see that when we have Moose then
> perhaps neither is needed any more.
> I can also see that you say that many_to_many are not real relations -
> I covered that point in my email.

Actually, I said that many-many is a bridge across two relationships  
and that we needed to cover the general case of that in terms of the  
result_source level infrastructure, including providing metadata.

What I was expecting was a proposal of how to handle that and what  
metadata would be required, plus how it would work in with the  
current implementation.

Instead, you sent a message suggesting two options I'd already told  
you weren't of any use (it's NOT A RELATIONSHIP so your option 1 is  
clearly useless as I've had to tell you every single time we've  
discussed this, and it's a general case of relationship bridges so  
clearly many_to_many_relationships as a one-off hack is just as stupid).

RFC when you've actually sat down and thought about it, please.
-- 
Matt S Trout, Technical Director, Shadowcat Systems Ltd.
Offering custom development, consultancy and support contracts for  
Catalyst,
DBIx::Class and BAST. Contact mst (at) shadowcatsystems.co.uk for  
details.
+ Help us build a better perl ORM: http://dbix- 
class.shadowcatsystems.co.uk/ +