Leyne, Sean wrote:

>Roman,
>
>
>
>>Clear, I prefer the second solution, where
>>"system-defined functions" cannot be overriden by the user.
>>
>>
>
>I also agree. System functions are never to be overridden by user
>functions.
>
>

Unless you agree that additional system function can never be added (and
I hope you wouldn't), there is the problem that new system functions
will mask (and break) existing user defined functions.

>
>
>
>>P.S. Just came to my mind: can it be that you suggest to make the list
>>of available system-defined functions (e.g. functions that are
>>available without declaration) configurable on per-database level and
>>provide a possibility to implement them in different languages?
>>
>>
>
>I disagree with this notion.
>
>An SDF is implemented within the engine, they are not external to the
>engine. As such, they can be implemented in any language which the
>engine build can support.
>
>

That's a meaningless distinction. What earthly difference does it make
where the code lives?

>They are 'standard' as defined by the version of the Firebird engine,
>they do not vary by database or by platform.
>
>
>

Pish-tosh. The set changes all the time without notice. If Firebird
introduces a new function that overlaps a site specific user function,
it makes all the sense in the world to change the configuration so the
new function either has a different name or disappears from the
namespace altogether.

--

Jim Starkey
Netfrastructure, Inc.
978 526-1376