[ic] Verifone IPCharge
mike at perusion.com
Fri Mar 20 20:35:01 UTC 2009
Quoting Richard Siddall (richard.siddall at elirion.net):
> Mike Heins wrote:
> > Remember too, that the very nature of Business::OnlinePayment means
> > that you have the potential to be adding new parameters all the time, as you
> > add payment modules. You have to pass them along somehow.
> I'm aware of that. I believe Ivan Kohler was aware of it too when he
> provided a way of passing additional parameters to the
> Business::OnlinePayment constructor.
> > Passing *all* of $opt along means a chance of conflict. So the mappable
> > extra parameters seems ideal to me. The alternative is hacking on
> > the module code all the time, which seems non-optimal to me.
> I don't see why you'd have to hack on the module code if you already
> have a way of passing extra parameters. Adding a second way of doing it
> just bloats the code.
Obviously you don't know the Interchange way. Bloat 'R us. 8-)
You may be right, but maybe not. It could be that the current
way of doing it is what should be removed.
There is no way to remap or account for conflicting key names the way
that is provided. If we are going to use this as a main payment method I
think a little flexibility is required. All it would take is for one of
the payment modules to require "gateway" as a parameter, and it is
broken. Doesn't sound like a good solution to me.
Perusion -- Expert Interchange Consulting http://www.perusion.com/
phone +1.765.328.4479 <mike at perusion.com>
An amateur practices until he gets it right. A pro
practices until he can't get it wrong. -- unknown
More information about the interchange-users