"Jim Starkey" <jas@...> wrote:

>
> There's nothing wrong with that solution other than it isn't SQL. Sure,
> anyone can call anything SQL if they wish, but calling it SQL doesn't
> make it SQL.

Then we already have a lot of non-SQL (in your terms) language stuff ;-)

> Virtually all of my application level programming is in Java, for
> example, and JDBC has no way to support the construct above. [OK, I
> suppose you could argue that it doesn't have a way to access a sequence,
> either, which would rather put me on the spot].

Since Java can process input and output params (e.g. EXEC PROC) correctly,
it can process INSERT ... RETURNING as well. There's no difference here.


Dmitry