Roman Rokytskyy wrote:

>Jim,
>
>
>
>>Unless you have a strong argument to the contrary, I'm going to insist
>>that you use the ResultSet definition already in use.
>>
>>
>
>Would you care to comment my post about what is left from the
>ResultSet interface if we remove getters for each type?
>
>If you think that getters are the main feature of ResultSet, can you
>please explain why it is much more better than PARAMDSC structure for
>example?
>
>
>
>

We already have a ResultSet implemented with three implementations, one
inside of Vulcan, one in the layered IscDbc interface, and one inside
the ODBC driver. Unless there is a very strong reason to the contrary,
we don't need another bloody one.


--

Jim Starkey
Netfrastructure, Inc.
978 526-1376