brett at clientcomm.com.au
Fri Sep 21 00:20:16 GMT 2007
Do you mean do not use "search_literal" at all in DBIx::Class code?
Matt S Trout wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 08:43:20AM +0100, Ash Berlin wrote:
>> brett gardner wrote:
>>> I think I have found a bug with search_literal. If you get a resultset
>>> that came from a search_literal, and try to apply another search_literal
>>> to it, the bind values are in the wrong order eg.
>>> my $rs = $schema->resultset('Foo')->search_literal('foo = ?', 1);
>>> $rs = $rs->search_literal('bar = ?',2);
>>> Spits out the sql
>>> SELECT foo.field
>>> FROM foo
>>> WHERE ( ( foo.bar = ? AND foo.foo = ? ) )
>>> With a bind values array of "[1,2]". It should be a bind values array of
>>> It seems to be adding the second literal string to the front of the
>>> where clause, but adding the values to the end of the array.
>>> I'm using 0.08003 but a quick search in the change log doesn't mention
>>> anything about search_literal
>>> Brett Gardner
>> Sounds like a bug to me - can you please whip up a patch that gives us a
>> failing test case?
> Plus a doc patch saying "this only exists for Class::DBI compatibility, do
> -not- use in normal DBIx::Class code".
More information about the DBIx-Class