Mailing-List: contact derby-user-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Derby Discussion" <derby-user@db.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy)
Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007 17:47:39 +0200
From: Oystein Grovlen - Sun Norway <Oystein.Grovlen@Sun.COM>
Subject: Re: Procedure return value
In-reply-to: <5A3418AC7876DC4B9FEEC69799C39B1F205591@servo.Traderoot.local>
Sender: Oystein.Grovlen@Sun.COM
To: Derby Discussion <derby-user@db.apache.org>
Message-id: <469B931B.7070203@sun.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT
References: <5A3418AC7876DC4B9FEEC69799C39B1F205591@servo.Traderoot.local>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070419)

Jacques Coetzee wrote:
> First off, this is not really a bug, it's more of a restriction.
>  
> As per the needs of my inhouse framework I need a procedure to be able 
> to return a value other than
> a ResultSet (I need a integer). The reason I need to use a procedure; is 
> because I'm using INOUT parameters.
>  
> When call my procedure, it needs to look like this:
>  
> { ? = call myProcedure(?,?,?,?,?,?)}
>  
> Where the first ? represents a status-code, ie a failure = -1, and a 
> successfull would be 1.
> All the other procedure paramters are INOUT.

I am probably missing something, but can you not let the status-code be 
an INOUT parameter?

-- 
�ystein