Subject | Re[4]: [firebird-support] Re: Stored Procedure as a Function? |
---|---|
Author | Nando Dessena |
Post date | 2003-09-26T12:47:31Z |
Martijn,
MT> record for
MT> fetch operation " - but that might be my Fb version ( WI-T1.5.0.3481
MT> Firebird 1.5
MT> Release Candidate 3)
it always worked in InterBase; just tried and it works in my RC2.
Not that I do it ofter enough to say it always works.
MT> very much more "clean" in this regard.
that's exactly what I meant for "syntactic sugar": the ability to use
a better, cleaner syntax to do a task that's already possible through an
alternate, worse syntax. So we don't disagree after all. :-)
Ciao
--
Nando mailto:nandod@...
>> select foo.col1, xy.outputparamMT> Tss - it actually does, sort of, although I currently get a "no current
>> from foo
>> join someproc(...) xy on foo.col2 = xy.outputparam
MT> record for
MT> fetch operation " - but that might be my Fb version ( WI-T1.5.0.3481
MT> Firebird 1.5
MT> Release Candidate 3)
it always worked in InterBase; just tried and it works in my RC2.
Not that I do it ofter enough to say it always works.
>> I second the idea of CREATE FUNCTION, even though it's only syntacticMT> Disagree - a FUNCTION allows usage without SELECT etc and can be
>> sugar AFAICT.
MT> very much more "clean" in this regard.
that's exactly what I meant for "syntactic sugar": the ability to use
a better, cleaner syntax to do a task that's already possible through an
alternate, worse syntax. So we don't disagree after all. :-)
Ciao
--
Nando mailto:nandod@...