19.07.2017 17:44, Leyne, Sean wrote:
Why do we need to extend the current function? Why not create separate, built-in, functions for each hash type with names* that align with the common algorithm name? MD2() ... MD5() SHA0() SHA1() SHA_224() ... SHA512_256() ... SHA3_224() ... SHA3_512()
Too many new keywords to be reserved.
(would save needing to look at documentation to determine the supported algorithms)?
HASH(X USING MD5) is self-documentary as well. Dmitry ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
