On 9/23/12 9:22 PM, red_october2009 wrote:

> I used UDFs for years until FB2x came along. I view UDFs as a stop gap non-standard solution until a built-in standard solution can be implemented. I would much rather dump all my UDFs and use FB functions instead.

Of course, that is one reason for providing the UDF capability.

Another reason is to allow database users to implement functionality
that does not have widespread appeal or need and which, therefore, will
probably not be implemented as built-in functions. That is why I think
Andrea suggested UDF was the best solution available to you.

In any event, if Firebird were to acquire a text diff capability, I
would hope it would conform to some standard. Or at least some widely
used convention such as how source code patches are often
described/offered/documented/shared.

Doug C.