[Firebird-devel] [FB-Tracker] Created: (CORE-5759) context already in use (BLR error) for query used `with` and `subqueries`

2018-02-22 Thread Artem Anufriev (JIRA)
context already in use (BLR error) for query used `with` and `subqueries` - Key: CORE-5759 URL: http://tracker.firebirdsql.org/browse/CORE-5759 Project: Firebird Core Is

[Firebird-devel] Valid date or not

2018-02-22 Thread Adriano dos Santos Fernandes
Hi! As part of CORE-5750 problems, I found that Firebird considers '12Mar92' as a valid date (1992-03-12). Should this be considered a bug, i.e., separators should be necessary in this case (12-Mar-92, 12/Mar/92, 12.Mar.92)? Adriano -

Re: [Firebird-devel] Valid date or not

2018-02-22 Thread Alex Peshkoff via Firebird-devel
On 02/22/18 16:33, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote: Hi! As part of CORE-5750 problems, I found that Firebird considers '12Mar92' as a valid date (1992-03-12). Should this be considered a bug, i.e., separators should be necessary in this case (12-Mar-92, 12/Mar/92, 12.Mar.92)? Let's better

Re: [Firebird-devel] Valid date or not

2018-02-22 Thread Mark Rotteveel
On 22-2-2018 14:33, Adriano dos Santos Fernandes wrote: As part of CORE-5750 problems, I found that Firebird considers '12Mar92' as a valid date (1992-03-12). Should this be considered a bug, i.e., separators should be necessary in this case (12-Mar-92, 12/Mar/92, 12.Mar.92)? I'd argue that we

Re: [Firebird-devel] Valid date or not

2018-02-22 Thread Dmitry Yemanov
22.02.2018 16:41, Alex Peshkoff wrote: As part of CORE-5750 problems, I found that Firebird considers '12Mar92' as a valid date (1992-03-12). Should this be considered a bug, i.e., separators should be necessary in this case (12-Mar-92, 12/Mar/92, 12.Mar.92)? Let's better treat it as standar

Re: [Firebird-devel] Valid date or not

2018-02-22 Thread Adriano dos Santos Fernandes
Em 22/02/2018 12:39, Dmitry Yemanov escreveu: > 22.02.2018 16:41, Alex Peshkoff wrote: >> >>> As part of CORE-5750 problems, I found that Firebird considers '12Mar92' >>> as a valid date (1992-03-12). >>> >>> Should this be considered a bug, i.e., separators should be necessary in >>> this case (12