On 03/03/17 14:48, Vlad Khorsun wrote: > 03.03.2017 13:15, Alex Peshkoff wrote: >> On 03/01/17 20:51, Vlad Khorsun wrote: >>> 01.03.2017 19:22, Dmitry Yemanov wrote: >>>>> 01.03.2017 19:50, Vlad Khorsun wrote: >>> .. >>>>> Also, I prefer to avoid to return as a string something that is not a >>>>> string. >>>> Agreed here. From another side, I don't like polluting the global >>>> namespace with non-standard but reserved keywords. >>> Same here. Therefore i offer such long names, to avoid possible >>> clashes :) >>> So, what will be our decision ? >> Vlad, what happens if user already had variable >> CURRENT_TRANSACTION_TIMESTAMP in his code? > It is obvious - (s)he should rename such variable. > >> I ask cause this name has (as far as I can see in SQL 2008) nothing to >> do with SQL standard and someone might easily call his variable this way, > Should we never add new non-standard system functions because of this ?
May be I was not enough precise - that's not big problem for major release (FB4), but not good for 3.0.2. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most engaging tech sites, SlashDot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot Firebird-Devel mailing list, web interface at https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/firebird-devel
