Hi Fred,


ft@... schrieb:

> The above will work with any JDBC complient driver. If a driver does
> not return all the ResultSet values with getXXXX(index), it
> is not JDBC complient.

Well, then Interclient isn't JDBC compliant, for the same holds true for
getXXX(name). I wouldn't go as far as calling a driver non-compliant
because of such a problem.

> > A JDBC driver must guarantee that findColumn(colname) always works

> Depends what "colname" is. If it's the name of the column in the
> table, it must. If it's a user-defined column I agree that it should
> (interclient doesn't and could be improved though I'm not sure it is
> required by the JDBC spec). Certainly, the driver should not add
> anything to the method arguments. Whether it should
> interpret "colname" values in the "tablename.label" format instead of
> returning a null depends on whether this is allowed by the spec and
> if (and how) other JDBC implementations use it.

For getXXX(colname) it would be the only way, at least I see no other.

> It's a good idea to follow the crowd, so to speak, to make the
> product useful to more people. However, inventing column labels where
> there was none is not part of JDBC or SQL and cannot serve a useful
> purpose.

So would you be against something like column4 as column name seen from
the outside, while the JDBC Driver maps this to ordinal numbers
internally?

Dietrich