> -----Original Message-----
> From: Marius Scurtescu [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, February 05, 2001 7:48 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: release JDBC tag library
>
>
> Morgan Delagrange wrote:
> >
> > Hi Marius,
> >
> > Since their syntax is so different, I'm thinking about
> > creating separate getDate, getTime and getTimestamp
> > tags. I like the idea of distinct functionality
> > having a distinct tag, and it would also remove the
> > need for passing in the field name of the JDBC type.
> > What do you think?
>
> It sounds pretty good. This will leave only the optional
> "format" and "locale" attributes. Along these lines we
> should add two more tags then: getFloat and getInt.
>
> getFloat would deal with the REAL, FLOAT and DOUBLE types,
> all treated as Double. getInt would deal with TINYINT,
> SMALLINT, INTEGER and BIGINT, all treated as Long.
> We could make the "format" attribute required for these
> two tags since it is the only reason to use them.
>
> The "format" attribute should not be required for getDate,
> and getTime though. Some databases don't have date and time
> types, only timestamp (MS SQL Server). In these cases,
> unless you specifically ask for date or time, you always
> get a timestamp. Just by using getDate or getTime tag
> you can extract the corresponding parts.
>
> getTimestamp should require the "format" attribute.
>
> I could create all these tags based on the code I
> wrote so far. Let me know if I should do it.
I may be able to work with what you've done so far. Let me fool around with it a little, and if I get bogged down I'll give you a ring. Good work, I think these changes will potentially improve internationalization significantly.
- M
