Subject | Re: [firebird-support] Boolean type |
---|---|
Author | Helen Borrie |
Post date | 2006-10-20T08:17:47Z |
At 05:21 PM 20/10/2006, you wrote:
have a Boolean type; or False to Firebird having a Boolean type. :-)
know the half of it.
(yet). But as long as you define a domain that covers what you want
your Boolean rules to be and you use the domain consistently for all
your Boolean columns, it's not too much of a burden to use the
underlying data type while we await the implementation that will
enable domains to stand as pseudo types in PSQL. (It's not trivial,
either; just less non-trivial than implementing a range of Boolean
types that would work everywhere the way people expect Boolean types to work!)
./heLen
>Is it just me missing something obvious, or does FB 2 (or any revNow, how does one answer this question? True - Firebird does not
>for that mtter) not have a boolean type?
have a Boolean type; or False to Firebird having a Boolean type. :-)
>Would be nice to have native support for something that seems so simple.Simple to use? or simple to implement? for the latter, you don't
know the half of it.
>Yes, I amTrue, you cannot declare a PSQL variable with a domain as its type
>aware I can create a domain to simulate it, but that falls short (if
>I understand correctly) as I
>cannot pass a domain definition into an SP.
(yet). But as long as you define a domain that covers what you want
your Boolean rules to be and you use the domain consistently for all
your Boolean columns, it's not too much of a burden to use the
underlying data type while we await the implementation that will
enable domains to stand as pseudo types in PSQL. (It's not trivial,
either; just less non-trivial than implementing a range of Boolean
types that would work everywhere the way people expect Boolean types to work!)
./heLen