Subject | Re: [IB-Architect] UDF and null |
---|---|
Author | Ann W. Harrison |
Post date | 2000-12-02T00:51:17Z |
At 11:38 AM 12/2/2000 +1100, Helen Borrie wrote:
that we'd have to retain the mechanism for upward compatibility.
The replacement is ill-defined, but I think it smells like coffee.
Regards,
Ann
www.ibphoenix.com
We have answers.
I have questions.
>I wrote:Because they're horribly insecure. Yes, there's no doubt
> >In the long run, the right thing to do with UDF's is to
> >replace them (85% confidence).
>
>Oh? why? replace with what?
that we'd have to retain the mechanism for upward compatibility.
The replacement is ill-defined, but I think it smells like coffee.
Regards,
Ann
www.ibphoenix.com
We have answers.
I have questions.