>
>>>If this is an actual data set, then how does it differ from LTTs?
>>
> "Ann W. Harrison" <aharrison@...> wrote:
>>Local temporary tables are defined in the SQL standard to have the
>>scope of SQL modules. We don't (yet) implement SQL modules so local
>>temporary tables are irrelevant and inapplicable to Firebird.
>
> Dmitry Yemanov wrote:

> I proposed a valid solution which allows us to have what _we_ call LTTs

Your proposal used syntax defined in the standard and gave it
implementation defined semantics. Those of you who live in countries
with free and open political systems and an independent press may not
understand the corrupting power of matching well-understood words with
semantics understood only by the speaker. In my country, we have a
thing called the "Patriot Act" - opposing it means you're unpatriotic -
which should be called the "Gut the Bill of Rights Act." Our "Clean
Skies Act" should be called the "Industrial Pollutants Free Release
Act". Then there's "Operation Enduring Freedom" aka "Afghan Warlord's
Empowerment" and "Operation Iraqi Freedom" - don't count the dead...


Words are important. Using well-defined words to mean things other than
their common definition leads to intellectual corruption. In our very
minor world, we can try to be clear.

>
>
>>The advantages of the proposed syntax over the syntax of the standard
>>include 1) The declaration and modification of transient data sets are
>>DML, so we don't get into the DML/DDL mire.
>
>
> CREATE/DROP INDEX and DROP TDS are also DML? Interesting.

Suggestions? My statement above is correct - creation and modification
are DML and happen without a commit. Being able to release a TDS
before the end of the session seems desirable... as does the ability to
index the data.



Regards,


Ann