Hello Igor, Saturday, January 19, 2008, 12:02:15 AM, you wrote:
IT> You misunderstand the dynamics of datatypes then. Yes maybe. With the current implementation i really do not understand the point anyway neither with my understanding nor with yours. IT> Wait a minute. Didn't you just say that you _want_ text strings to be IT> able to contain control characters? So what's left for the BLOB then? IT> Suppose I want to insert, say, a bitmap image into the database - as a IT> BLOB, naturally. You are saying that, if it doesn't just happen to IT> contain at least one zero byte, it will have to go in as a string. So if IT> it has a black pixel, it's a BLOB. If it doesn't have any black pixels, IT> it's a string. Does this really make sense to you? Yes the only reason left for a BLOB would be a containing zero byte and any illegal UTF8 sequence of bytes. For me it looks like the introduction of the current logic is just for backward compatibility that embedded 0 characters are not allowed in a string. IMHO it would be cleaner if we conceptionally only have BLOBS and check for other datatypes on demand maybe with some caching. Exactly what TCL is doing it when it assumes everything is a string and (since version 7.X )we got the cached integer or double values. But well i can code around this like usual but i will bring up the topic again if there is a discussion about a 4.0 release. -- Best regards, Lothar Scholz mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
