Subject | [IBO] Re: GSG042. YES LIKE. |
---|---|
Author | Marco Menardi |
Post date | 2002-10-09T17:10:41Z |
Welll, reading GSG, yes, TAILING property is regarding BLANKS... so I don't understant it's usage :(
With NO TAILING the SQL generated is "STARTING WITH", and this is the way I've used it, to avoid exact match.
But what about "blanks"? I've tryed to enter:
'GEOFF'
or
'GEOFF '
or
' GEOFF '
but with or without NO TAILING the SQL uses the field value as:
'GEOFF' (i.e. NAME='GEOFF' or NAME STARTING 'GEOFF')
so???
Is GSG wrong, or IBO? I think that BLANK has nothing to do with this property (in fact, in the Query editor, at the right of this property there is a label:
"automatically ignore tailing characters for search mode"
characters, not blanks
Helen? Geoff? Jason?
With NO TAILING the SQL generated is "STARTING WITH", and this is the way I've used it, to avoid exact match.
But what about "blanks"? I've tryed to enter:
'GEOFF'
or
'GEOFF '
or
' GEOFF '
but with or without NO TAILING the SQL uses the field value as:
'GEOFF' (i.e. NAME='GEOFF' or NAME STARTING 'GEOFF')
so???
Is GSG wrong, or IBO? I think that BLANK has nothing to do with this property (in fact, in the Query editor, at the right of this property there is a label:
"automatically ignore tailing characters for search mode"
characters, not blanks
Helen? Geoff? Jason?
--- In IBObjects@y..., "Marco Menardi" <mmenaz@l...> wrote:
> --- In IBObjects@y..., Geoff Worboys <geoff@t...> wrote:
> > > Now I've tried YES CASE and YES TRAILING but they seem to have no
> > > effect... urgh... this must be investigated...
> >
> > YESCASE and YESTRAILING were introduced to allow special
> > contradiction of the TIB_Connection DefaultNoCase and
> > DefaultNoTrailing properties.
> >
> > That is...
>
> Fabolous, since I use DefaultNoTrailing properties of TIB_Connection true.
> It has been a misunderstanding... since I've never set this property, when I had a brief read about it today I've read "NO TAILING (BLANKS)", so I thought it was related to tailing blanks a user could enter at the end of the search string!
> No, it works as expected :))
>