Re: How NOT to do it

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: How NOT to do it by jlawrenc (Scribe) on Mar 20, 2001 at 00:55 UTC
HA HA HA - touche!	[reply]
Re: Re: How NOT to do it by jimberg (Novice) on Mar 19, 2001 at 18:24 UTC
Obviously a Windoze Axe-S guru. Racle SQL has had a length function since at least version 6	[reply]
Re:x3 How NOT to do it by grinder (Bishop) on Mar 19, 2001 at 20:04 UTC
Actually no, Sybase. You actually made me go look at the documentation. Turns out that there does exist such a function in Sybase, but it's called `char_leng` (talk about obvious). In any event, there are length functions in the various SQL dialects, but there is no such beast in the SQL standard (although it's been years since I've tracked the standard closely, SQL-92 is still pretty new-fangled for me). So much for portability. -- `g r i n d e r`	[reply]
Re (tilly) 4: How NOT to do it by tilly (Archbishop) on Mar 19, 2001 at 20:21 UTC
But note that SQL is pretty unusual. For instance how many other programming languages do you know which, by design, are not Turing complete? Brownie points to the first person who can say why it is very important that SQL not be a Turing complete language. :-)	[reply]
Re: Re (tilly) 4: How NOT to do it by Louis_Wu (Chaplain) on Sep 11, 2003 at 05:11 UTC
Re: Re: Re (tilly) 4: How NOT to do it by tilly (Archbishop) on Sep 17, 2003 at 04:38 UTC
Re: Re: Re (tilly) 4: How NOT to do it by antirice (Priest) on Sep 11, 2003 at 05:39 UTC
Some notes below your chosen depth have not been shown here