Subject | Re: [firebird-support] Upper case behaviour |
---|---|
Author | Woody |
Post date | 2007-12-04T16:50:14Z |
From: "Nando Dessena" <nando@...>
table/field/proc names. It has no bearing on executing SQL at all, unless
quotes are used, so it's mainly only for the developer to be able to view it
that way. Clients will never, well generally never, see it because you
define column titles, etc. with real names, not field names when displaying.
I can tell you this. Whenever I compare strings in my own programs, I
compare them using case insensitive functions. I don't care how it was
input, it's always done that way. I'm fairly certain FB could be coded the
same way by having a common function that would test for all possibilities.
The biggest problem for this is that it would slow down processing by always
having to run these tests on every identifier. It may not seem like much,
but I'm sure it's done often enough to make it a sticking point, IMO.
Woody (TMW)
>I understand that but it is only an issue when printing out or looking at
> The OP is just asking for Firebird to stay case-insensitive but become
> case-preserving, meaning it will spit out whatever case was used
> during definition. This can be done without breaking the SQL standard
> (SQL Server is a good example), but I guess it would be a very
> pervasive change to Firebird's code base. Too much to be considered.
>
table/field/proc names. It has no bearing on executing SQL at all, unless
quotes are used, so it's mainly only for the developer to be able to view it
that way. Clients will never, well generally never, see it because you
define column titles, etc. with real names, not field names when displaying.
I can tell you this. Whenever I compare strings in my own programs, I
compare them using case insensitive functions. I don't care how it was
input, it's always done that way. I'm fairly certain FB could be coded the
same way by having a common function that would test for all possibilities.
The biggest problem for this is that it would slow down processing by always
having to run these tests on every identifier. It may not seem like much,
but I'm sure it's done often enough to make it a sticking point, IMO.
Woody (TMW)