Parameter parsing fixes

[lstrojny]

Fix for #301 has been reverted to address http://www.doctrine-project.org/jira/browse/DBAL-496. This fix addresses both issues in a consistent manner and ads a few more tests.

[doctrinebot]

Hello,

thank you for creating this pull request. I have automatically opened an issue
on our Jira Bug Tracker for you. See the issue link:

http://www.doctrine-project.org/jira/browse/DBAL-501

We use Jira to track the state of pull requests and the versions they got
included in.

[stof]

no need for else as the if throws an exception

[lstrojny]

Mutual exclusiveness is better communicated that way. That's why there is an else.

[stof]

but it does not follow our coding standards

[guilhermeblanco]

http://www.slideshare.net/guilhermeblanco/object-calisthenics-applied-to-php

[lsmith77]

using this branch I was able to successfully run the Jackalope Doctrine DBAL test suite with MySQL. Note for SQLite I wasnt able to run the test suite since it seems like drop FK statements are no longer ignored which makes the DB rest (https://github.com/jackalope/jackalope-doctrine-dbal/blob/master/src/Jackalope/Transport/DoctrineDBAL/RepositorySchema.php#L120) in our test suite fail:

PHP Fatal error:  Uncaught exception 'Doctrine\DBAL\DBALException' with message 'Sqlite platform does not support alter foreign key.' in /Users/lsmith/htdocs/cmf-sandbox/vendor/jackalope/jackalope-doctrine-dbal/vendor/doctrine/dbal/lib/Doctrine/DBAL/Platforms/SqlitePlatform.php:646

but that is another story :-/

[beberlei]

wait, so PDO supports $stmt->bindParam(':foo', $val); instead of $stmt->bindParam('foo', $val);

[lsmith77]

yes .. it supports both

[lstrojny]

Yep, that was the root cause of the compatibility break with the Jackalope DBAL component.

[beberlei]

I didn't know that, hence that code was never tested. :)

[lstrojny]

@beberlei could you advise on where to go from here?

[beberlei]

@lstrojny thinking about the SRP violation, a solution would be three methods,l but not sure if this is necessary here. Pondering with the problem... :)

[lstrojny]

Sure, three methods would work extractType, extractParam, and doExtract. But this code is complex as hell as it is, no need to add more. I was even thinking about inlining the whole conditions to spare a few method calls (as n can get pretty large potentially).