Subject | Re: [ib-support] [] or "" |
---|---|
Author | Paul Schmidt |
Post date | 2001-10-25T15:43:21Z |
On 23 Oct 2001, at 12:28, Woody wrote:
same thing? If there is then it should be adopted... Otherwise,
sure why not "Joe Blough" <> "JOE BLOUGH" but [Joe Blough] =
[JOE BLOUGH] However it should happen for dialect 5 (they went
from 1 to 3, so I assume the next one is 5). So that it doesn't
"break" any existing code that might be out there.
Paul
Paul Schmidt
Tricat Technologies
paul@...
www.tricattechnologies.com
> From: "Paul Schmidt" <paul@...>The basic question is, is there an SQL standard way of doing the
> > > Since this is a M$-only thing, we don't need to support this on
> > > Firebird or Interbase. Let's follow the SQL way and ride the road.
> > >
> >
> > I agree, for several reasons:
> >
> > 1) We still have official SQL standards to implement from SQL-99
> >
> > 2) We have better things to do, like implementing server side
> > aliases, and replacing the services API with something that makes
> > sense, and hopefully can be done with SQL.
> >
> > 3) Microsoft has a habit of changing the "standards" they define,
> > just ask a VB6 programmer what they think of VB.Net!
> >
>
> I wasn't advovating MS's method of using brackets over using quotes. I
> was simply stating the difference when using the two. I would like to
> see a case-insensitive way of using delimiters around field or table
> names if only to allow additional characters to be used in the names.
> I don't want it to take literally, the case of the letters, just have
> a way to distinguish that it has special characters in it.
>
same thing? If there is then it should be adopted... Otherwise,
sure why not "Joe Blough" <> "JOE BLOUGH" but [Joe Blough] =
[JOE BLOUGH] However it should happen for dialect 5 (they went
from 1 to 3, so I assume the next one is 5). So that it doesn't
"break" any existing code that might be out there.
Paul
Paul Schmidt
Tricat Technologies
paul@...
www.tricattechnologies.com