Sundar, Read my post again. And then again.
Guys, was my post really so ambiguous ? I don't mind anyone disagreeing with me but I thought it was obvious to everyone (even the OP, I would say) that any object can be passed as a parameter. I would not assume the question to be so naïve. The question is significant because the DataReader is not just *any* object. Rhaazy, in my opinion, that is not the "unnecessary" part of the question, but the crucial part of the question. It is what makes the question worth a second thought. I would strongly discourage anyone passing around an active DataReader through various layers and applications. I would much rather extract the data into another data store or collection first and dispose of the DataReader immediately. But that's just me. On Sep 24, 11:05 pm, "sundar irene" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > data reader is not disconnected object only dataset is disconnected object > On 9/24/08, Cerebrus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > "Alright" ?? No, I don't think it would be alright at all. If it were > > a disconnected data store, I wouldn't have any reservations, though. > > > On Sep 24, 2:50 pm, Benj Nunez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hello everyone, > > > > Just out of curiosity: Is it alright to pass a datareader object to a > > > method or not?- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DotNetDevelopment, VB.NET, C# .NET, ADO.NET, ASP.NET, XML, XML Web Services,.NET Remoting" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://cm.megasolutions.net/forums/default.aspx -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
