Am 12.02.10 08:29, schrieb Frank Schoenheit, Sun Microsystems Germany: > Hi Marc, > >> Maybe a third mode could help here: Semi-Native SQL, where base would >> only scan for parameter definitions using the :<name> scheme. > > Hmm, don't like this idea too much. Basically, it would be completely > intransparent to the user. This is not per se a bad thing :), but if > things are prone to failure (and parsing queries which the user said > "don't even attempt to do" *are*), then we should not do them silently, > and without a chance for the user to intervene.
So what can we do about the issue at hand? Most stored procedures take parameters (else we could easily make them view, right?) Can the internal SQL parser be changed to accept statements like SELECT * FROM function(:parameter) ? Should be fairly straightforward to distinguish a table name from a function name. > >> [0=1] >> What a hack ;) > > Well, yes, kind of :). On the other hand, it worked well for a decade or > so, and as said, I assume the original authors had reasons for doing it. > Still, I'd say we should think about removing it. Yes. Kinda weird construct ;) > > Ciao > Frank > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
