04-10-2009, 09:44 AM
|
#33 (permalink)
|
|
The Prestige
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Sweden, Stockholm
Posts: 1,080
Thanks: 115
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by WebSavvy
By the same token, why would I want a pagination script that's doing more things than what I need?
I don't use anything other than MySQL and the only things I require to be paginated are results from a database. My usage is in my directory script and it works perfectly fine for me. I have no desire to change what isn't broken.
However, I can see examples of some instances where someone would require pagination that isn't database dependent. So, it basically comes down to this: People will use what fits their needs and suits their purposes.  |
It's not doing more things than what you need. It's doing exactlyy what you need. It just CAN do other things aswell.
I don't use anything other than MySQL aswell, which is why my example usage of the pagination class was based on MySQL - heck, I didn't even know how to use the class without MySQL. But my point still stands. Why use something that is limited to one thing, instead of using a more "allround" solution. It will work with your database. It will work later when you do use results from another source, for example an image folder on your host.
It's like.. buying a stereo, and there are 2 types of stereos, one that supports only CD, and then another that supports CD and DVD. They're the same price. You only use CD, so you buy the one that only supports CD, but then later, you wanna use DVD cause everything moves over from CD to DVD, then you'd need to buy another one. In this case you would need to recode your whole script just so it can support pagination for data other than results from a database.
Quote:
Originally Posted by allworknoplay
It's the way I read what you wrote. After reading it I can see what you mean, but I will explain what I thought you meant anyways since I like to talk a lot... 
When you said, "this should work in mySQL, eventhough your example is based on mySQL"
When you read it fast it looks like you meant to say that one of them is MS SQL like this:
"this should work in mySQL, eventhough my example is based on MS SQL"...
The way it's worded, sounds like it's designed to work with one DB and SHOULD work in another DB, eventhough it was designed with a different DB...see what I mean? |
OOoh, I see. No no, I meant exactly what I wrote: This should work without MySQL(with any array of data), even if I used MySQL in my example xD ^_^
__________________
|
|
|
|