At 28/02/2002 08:53 AM, you wrote:

>Platform: Firebird RC2
>
>Hello all!
>
>Been working to finally getting to the latest firebird, etc, and came
>across some code in a code library that basically issued the
>statement: (pseudocode)
>
>CREATE TABLE(FieldName VARCHAR(80) not null, FieldName2 VARCHAR(30)
>null);
>
>Firebird was dying on the "not null" part of the statement. And
>whoever put it into the code library had the note: "SQL-92 Standard?"
>
>I started to look through the spec and just got glazed over rather
>quickly and never found whether "not null" is part of the spec. So
>what I'm asking is:
>
>1 - Do any of your SQL-92 gurus know whether it is or it isn't?

It is part of the SQL-92 standard. I fount it in the document under
"column definition" as a column constraint. On the other hand, looking at
your statement, your second field definition shouldn't contain "null",
since this is not part of the specs of the language, unless you mean
"DEFAULT NULL" and that's how it should be written.

>2 - If it is, is it worthwhile to report it as a conformance bug?

Please reverify your statement and maybe have more responses before doing
so. I use the NOT NULL quite often without any problems.


Daniel Rail
Senior System Engineer
ACCRA Group Inc. (www.accra.ca)
ACCRA Med Software Inc. (www.accramed.ca)