Jiri et al,

> The INSERT OR UPDATE seems to
> be (from my view) be the best word for this, but - as Nando said -

dumb

> parsers can be confused...

While I am very happy to see that my suggestion for the name is getting
much support, I am also a little confused by the references to the "dumb
parsers".

Does this refer to a fear of the FB engine or related parsers not being
able to handle the new command?

Or are the references for external tools (IBExpert, Database
Workbench...)?


If we are talking about external tools, then I must candidly say that we
shouldn't be worrying about them. Regardless of the name
selected/agreed upon, we need to make a decision which is best for the
*product* (Firebird), period!

If the external tool makers have a problem, let *them* come forward and
advocate why we need to use a "less appropriate" name to help them solve
a problem with their bad/poor parser(s) -- after all, their poor tool is
not our problem!

Given that the tool makers were able to add support for "CREATE OR
ALTER", I can't see why "INSERT OR UPDATE" would pose any greater
challenge.


(I would say the same of the FB parser itself -- if it is not up to the
task, then a better on must be found! New features and logical syntax
should not be bound by dumb routines)


Finally, while I can't say that all tool makers follow this list, I
known that Martijn has been following this discussion, and I'm sure that
he would have voice his concerns about any of the names discussed.

(If he could stop drinking the beers in the hotel bar long enough to
write a coherent sentence! ;-]]] Sorry, I wasn't able to join you
again this year!)


Sean