Rick Hillegas wrote:
Other forms of parameterization are allowed by the standard. It is
just that ? parameters are not explicitly included. The consensus of
the committee members who discussed this was that this was an
oversight, and no-one could explain why ? parameters had been omitted.
The ? parameters would be, technically, an extension to what's in the
standard--an extension which is compatible with the standard and which
clearly fits the standard's intent.
Thanks Rick for the clarification. My questions on this now are:
1) What would we do if for some reason this didn't make the standard?
Would we back it out and break existing applications or remain forked
from the standard?
2) What is the impact on users migrating to other database products?
Often Derby is used as a development database and/or as one of many
database options. How would we mitigate portability concerns?
3) Does this create a slippery slope for violation of our standards
based charter?
I think all three of these could be mitigated if we could get a public
commitment from the SQL committee that this *will* be included in the
2011 spec or get a commitment from the JDBC committee on the escape
syntax that will be supported in JDBC 4.1 and implement that. Is it
possible to get such a commitment?
Kathey
