I found the problem and have a workaround now.
The problem is caused by a selection field,
which is a text field, that might be null.
This field can either be
- null
- empty string (don't know if this is different from null)
-'0'
- 0 (don't know if this is different from the string
Dennis Cote <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Being a C programmer, Richard extended SQLite to allow C syntax for
> equality and inequality comparisons as shown at
> http://www.sqlite.org/lang_expr.html even though it is non standard.
Actually, the reason I did this was because PostgreSQL did
it
Dennis Cote wrote:
Stef Mientki wrote:
But it doesn't solve my problem :-(
I've the feeling that despite the suggestions of Igor,
the problem still exists, caused by the zero values ??
I'll try tomorrow again with some other values.
Stef,
Oh... I though Igor had solved your problem so I
Stef Mientki wrote:
But it doesn't solve my problem :-(
I've the feeling that despite the suggestions of Igor,
the problem still exists, caused by the zero values ??
I'll try tomorrow again with some other values.
Stef,
Oh... I though Igor had solved your problem so I didn't give it much
Dennis Cote wrote:
Stef Mientki wrote:
I don't know if this is the problem, but, for some reason you're
mixing C/C++ syntax in with SQL there.
You don't use '==', you should just use '='
You don't use '!=', you should use '<>'
thanks Paul,
but although I can never find this
Stef Mientki wrote:
I don't know if this is the problem, but, for some reason you're
mixing C/C++ syntax in with SQL there.
You don't use '==', you should just use '='
You don't use '!=', you should use '<>'
thanks Paul,
but although I can never find this information when I need it :-(
I don't know if this is the problem, but, for some reason you're
mixing C/C++ syntax in with SQL there.
You don't use '==', you should just use '='
You don't use '!=', you should use '<>'
thanks Paul,
but although I can never find this information when I need it :-(
AFAIK, both
At 16:45 17/04/2007, Stef Mientki wrote:
I don't understand this behaviour,
is this too complex ?
or am I doing something wrong ?
I use the following syntax, and I get 7 records back,
(which is not correct in my opinion)
SELECT PO.* FROM Koppel
LEFT JOIN PO
WHERE (Koppel.K_App == PO.App)
8 matches
Mail list logo