Both of these commands exist, and will run the same code. I seem to
recall that ns_puts is deprecated in favor of ns_adp_puts, for better
naming consistency, but the code doesn't say, and the CVS log doesn't give
a clue, either. Which is preferred? Or are both equally preferred? (or
equally
In a message dated 12/4/2002 5:23:41 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Both of these commands exist, and will run the same code. I seem to
recall that ns_puts is deprecated in favor of ns_adp_puts, for better
naming consistency, but the code doesn't say, and the CVS log doesn't
Another one.
Both of these commands are registered, and run the same code, and the code
does not appear to differentiate between the two. The current HTML docs
define ns_adp_registertag, but do not define ns_adp_registertag. Should
both be defined, with ns_adp_registercmd marked as deprecated?
There are actually three commands, all point to NsTclRegisterAdpCmd and have
an identical effect:
ns_register_adptag, NsTclRegisterTagCmd, NULL
ns_adp_registeradp, NsTclRegisterAdpCmd, NULL
ns_adp_registertag, NsTclRegisterAdpCmd, NULL
ns_register_adptag
and
ns_register_adptag and ns_adp_registeradp are different; the former causes
an ADP string to be invoked upon encountering the tag, and the latter
causes a Tcl proc to be invoked. My guess is that ns_adp_registertag is
too confusing, because it's name is close to the former, but it's a
synonym for
In a message dated 12/4/2002 5:48:15 PM Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think this should probably be fixed in code
someday, but for now the focus is on the docs, and I'm thinking that
ns_adp_registertag should be deprecated in favor of ns_adp_registeradp,
while continuing to
Hi Keith,
I have question about ns_db getrow. When I try to use multiple cursors, I
get the error message. Did you use multiple cursors? Does Informix driver
supports these?
Here are the details about my code and error message:
My code looks like:
.
.
foreach { db0 db1 } [ns_db gethandle
