db-derby-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Bernt M. Johnsen" <Bernt.John...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: setObject(idx, bigDecimal, Types.NUMERIC); doesn't work ?
Date Fri, 06 Jan 2006 14:59:30 GMT
>>>>>>>>>>>> Lance J. Andersen wrote (2006-01-06 09:14:46):
> The spec needs to be followed whether you agree or disagree with the 
> semantics.  The javadocs are very specific here and there must have been 
> a reason for this decision at the time.  As i indicated to Craig, I am 
> trying to find out if any of the previous spec leads recall why this was 
> done before i do anything else on this issue.

I agree that we need to follow the specs. Just wondered what Craig
thought his "big unfounded claim" would imply..... ;-)

> A change in this area could potentially break existing applications who 
> are relying on the functionality as documented.  This would have to be 
> weighed by the JDBC EG prior to any changes in behavior. 
> 
> It is just not a simple change the javadocs at this time.  This has to 
> be researched and discussed further.  It could well be that no one is 
> impacted, i just do not know at this point in time.
> 
> Regards
> Lance
> Bernt M. Johnsen wrote:
> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>Craig L Russell wrote (2006-01-05
16:59:00):
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>                         
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>Hi,
> >>
> >>I asked Lance Anderson, spec lead for JDBC 4.0, about this issue and  
> >>he replied that he thinks that due to compatibility with existing  
> >>applications that rely on this behavior, it's unlikely to change.
> >>
> >>My opinion is that the behavior is surprising, and that most  
> >>applications that discover that the API with a  BigDecimal parameter  
> >>truncates all the decimals, simply change to the API call that allows  
> >>you to specify the scale.
> >>
> >>So my big unfounded claim is that there is no use for the API without  
> >>the scale parameter taking a BigDecimal parameter with the current  
> >>behavior. And that changing it has low risk of untoward results.
> >>   
> >>
> >
> >Do you suggest that we should throw an exception if setObject without
> >scale is called with a BigDecimal argument? Or do you suggest that we
> >let setObject default to the scale of the BigDecimal parameter and
> >thus violating the spec? 
> >
> >Bernt
> >
> >
> > 
> >

-- 
Bernt Marius Johnsen, Database Technology Group, 
Staff Engineer, Technical Lead Derby/Java DB
Sun Microsystems, Trondheim, Norway

Mime
View raw message