That seems fair.

-----Original Message-----
From: Blas Rodriguez Somoza [mailto:blas@...]
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 10:33 AM
To: Firebird-Java@yahoogroups.com; Robert DiFalco
Subject: Re: [Firebird-Java] FBTimestampField and Longs


Hello

At 27/06/2003 10:09 -0700, Robert DiFalco wrote:

>Hi, I was wondering why the FBTimestamp field rejects setLong and
>getLong. It seems like a relatively easy thing to do, but I didn't know

>if maybe there was a specific reason to not allow this -- i.e. it's
>specifically disallowed by the JDBC standard or some such.

No it is not forbidden, but as it seems you know, this conversion it is
not
in the standard, and we prefer to implement exactly the standard at
least
until we have a full implementation of it.

Anyway, it don't seem too much work to use setTimestamp(new
Timestamp(long)) or getTimestamp(...).getTime().

If I'm not wrong I remember we discover some time ago that this is not a

good idea, since the value you get can be different from what you put
depending on your local time and the java version.


Regards
Blas Rodriguez Somoza