[vdr] Re: DELT: unexpected behaviour

[Matthias Schniedermeyer <ms@citd.de>]

On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 11:23:06PM +0100, Sergei Haller wrote:
> On Wed, 28 Jan 2004, Matthias Schniedermeyer (MS) wrote:
> 
> MS> On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 10:33:07PM +0100, Sergei Haller wrote:
> MS> >
> MS> > so I supposed that DELT has the same behaviour. Unfortunately not:
> MS>
> MS> Some people think strange things.
> 
> Why strange? That's what the documentations said about DELR. It didn't say
> the  same  about  DELT,  so I did never blame on DELT for deleting (or not
> deliting) the timer I wanted to delete.
> 
> MS> Two subsequend LSTRs are ALLOWED to give 2 completly different results.
> 
> yes. but I didn't do two LSTTs.
> 
> MS> In short:
> MS> Don't change thing only because people don't understand what going on.
> 
> I do well understand, what's going on here. I just wanted to point out the
> difference in the behaviour of the DELR/DELT commands:

Different things behave diffrently, i don't see the inherently problem.

And btw. instead of 'faking' a nonexisting id IMHO the "correct(tm)" key
should be used for deleting a recording. (Name/time)
This way you wouldn't have had the "problem" in the first place.

Btw2. Only because "one size fits all" doesn't mean that that is
good(tm).

Btw3. Timers/Channels are more complex than recording, you can add
and/or modify and/or sort the entries which isn't possibel for
recordings (at least not within SVDR). In other words. Without ACID
nothing goes here.

Btw4. I wouldn't have a problem with an ACID complient interface. In my
daily job i'm a database developer so i know perfectly well this type of
problem(s).




Bis denn

-- 
Real Programmers consider "what you see is what you get" to be just as 
bad a concept in Text Editors as it is in women. No, the Real Programmer
wants a "you asked for it, you got it" text editor -- complicated, 
cryptic, powerful, unforgiving, dangerous.



-- 
Info:
To unsubscribe send a mail to ecartis@linuxtv.org with "unsubscribe vdr" as subject.