On 25-Jan-02 Jeff Zucker wrote:
> Tim Bunce wrote:
>>
>> p.s. Of course the SQL standards team should be ashamed of creating
>> a syntax that risks breakage with things like:
>> "update foo set bar=bar-$value"
>> (If you can't see it, consider what happens if $value is negative."
>
> Go
Many moons ago you could approach Len Gallagher @ NIST.GOV who is/was on
the ANSI SQL committee. I'm sure someone from NIST still is active
and he could point you to the right people.
John
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Tim Bunce wrote:
>
> p.s. Of course the SQL standards team should be ashamed of creating
> a syntax that risks breakage with things like:
> "update foo set bar=bar-$value"
> (If you can't see it, consider what happens if $value is negative."
Good point. How will the preparser handle this
On Fri, Jan 25, 2002 at 08:39:40AM -0800, Jeff Zucker wrote:
> Tim Bunce wrote:
> >
> > Please make SQL92 the default as far as possible.
>
> That is *always* my aim but I welcome people monitoring me on it since I
> may make mistakes and since the standard is not always clear.
>
> > That mean
Tim Bunce wrote:
>
> Please make SQL92 the default as far as possible.
That is *always* my aim but I welcome people monitoring me on it since I
may make mistakes and since the standard is not always clear.
> That means all
> identifiers are case insentivive unless enclose in double quotes.
Oo
On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 01:00:19PM -0800, Jeff Zucker wrote:
> I am in the process of making SQL::Parser more able to handle a variety
> of implementation specific SQL syntaxs and would value suggestions both
> in terms of types of variations to handle and in the specifics shown
> below.
>
> The
I am in the process of making SQL::Parser more able to handle a variety
of implementation specific SQL syntaxs and would value suggestions both
in terms of types of variations to handle and in the specifics shown
below.
The three areas I have tackled first are case sensitivity of column
names, st
