On Fri, 1 Dec 2000, Ann W. Harrison wrote:

> In the long run, the right thing to do with UDF's is to
> replace them (85% confidence). In the mean time, does
> anyone have a suggestion for an alternate interface that
> would allow passing nulls?

UDF's are powerful, replace them with what? If you mean get
rid of them, my confidence level is about 0% that it should be
done. If you mean enhance them or replace them with something
better, fine but leave backward compatibility for those who
actually use them.

>
> That mechanism allowed the very clever (ambitious? overly
> eager? utterly insane?) programmer to write UDF's that were
> data type independent. There has been no great clamor
> for datatype independence from the user base, but there
> is frequent complaint about the absence of null handling.
>
> Suggestions?

I suggest they probably should use the "insane descriptor mode" as in
their case it has purpose, thus is sane.


Randal

>
> Regards,
>
> Ann
> www.ibphoenix.com
> We have answers.
>
>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> IB-Architect-unsubscribe@onelist.com
>
>
>