Re: Re: [RFC] Extended String Types For PDO

On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 12:57 AM, Lester Caine <lester@lsces.co.uk> wrote: > On 19/03/17 23:11, Rowan Collins wrote: > >> Sorry but I just don't agree with that. We are talking about a feature > >> for PDO that not many voters is interested in. That's completely > >> different than a language change. The interest in other core > >> extensions is often the same. > > > > Fair points. I'm not sure the RFC process as a whole works well for > > specialist decisions - the same has come up with very technical Engine > > changes. > > While PDO has gained some traction and some projects have switched over > to it, it would be useful to see what percentage of users do actually > take the PDO route and and those that still stay with other abstraction > options or remain with the generic drivers. My own preference is still > to ignore it as a base and stick with ADOdb, which does seem to be > growing again in support, but many projects have their own abstraction > layers which don't rely on PDO or for the likes of things like wordpress > only support MySQL anyway so don't need a cross database layer. > > None of the 'improvements' added to PDO recently do anything to improve > it's standing, it still lacks a real reason for existing ... > Given that most installs of Doctrine DBAL (80%+) rely on PDO MySQL, that's quite a lot of users: https://packagist.org/packages/doctrine/dbal/stats PDO is currently the leading DB abstraction in PHP projects, regardless of how horrible its API is. Marco Pivetta http://twitter.com/Ocramius http://ocramius.github.com/