On 11/04/13 13:28, Mark Rotteveel wrote: > On Mon, 04 Nov 2013 12:27:14 +0400, Dmitry Yemanov <firebi...@yandex.ru> > wrote: >> 04.11.2013 11:21, Alex wrote: >> >>> On the other hand, taking into an account that old API means first of >>> all backward compatibility, may be we should better keep legacy > behavior? >> I'd say that getting plan or statistics or any other info about >> unprepared (read: unknown) statement is nonsense and I don't see why >> someone would need that in the real life. This really deserves an error. > I don't think we should maintain legacy behavior which such dubious value. > This is just a test for Jaybird that I added because I was curious about > the behavior (I wanted to know if I needed to add additional state checks > around retrieving the plan), and because I wanted to codify the > expectations for various statement states in tests. I will simply change my > code to disallow retrieving the plan if the statement is unprepared (which > saves a roundtrip for the same error ;). >
I've added better diags, please check how does it looks now. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ November Webinars for C, C++, Fortran Developers Accelerate application performance with scalable programming models. Explore techniques for threading, error checking, porting, and tuning. Get the most from the latest Intel processors and coprocessors. See abstracts and register http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=60136231&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
