On Mar 12, 1:32 pm, Ron Lusk wrote:
> Works for me: I just overwrote my copy of resultset-seq with one that
> uses getColumnLabel, and I am now getting the results I expected from
> complex queries (in Interbase, at least).
>
> On Feb 23, 9:33 am, Rich Hickey wrote:
>
> > Sounds good to me - a
Works for me: I just overwrote my copy of resultset-seq with one that
uses getColumnLabel, and I am now getting the results I expected from
complex queries (in Interbase, at least).
On Feb 23, 9:33 am, Rich Hickey wrote:
> Sounds good to me - any drawbacks to this? Does it require that the
> col
On Feb 23, 8:33 am, Rich Hickey wrote:
> Sounds good to me - any drawbacks to this? Does it require that the
> columns be named explicitly?
I can't think of any drawbacks. When the column is not named
explicitly, getColumnLabel returns the same thing as getColumnName.
Rob
--~--~-~--
On Feb 22, 7:59 pm, Rob wrote:
> Hi,
>
> How about having this function call .getColumnLabel instead
> of .getColumnName. That way, you can do a join with duplicate column
> names and rename them in the SQL query...
>
> select name name1, name name2, ... from ...
>
> and resultset-seq won't th
Hi,
How about having this function call .getColumnLabel instead
of .getColumnName. That way, you can do a join with duplicate column
names and rename them in the SQL query...
select name name1, name name2, ... from ...
and resultset-seq won't throw an exception. ?
Rob
--~--~-~--~
