M
Mark Pearce
Hi Bob,
versions <<
Well, VS 2003 has no opinion on any of this - it's just an IDE. MS SQL, on
the other hand, is a superset of ANSI SQL, so the way in which database
nulls are handled is not controlled by MS at all - hence the discrepancy
that you see.
HTH,
Mark
--
Author of "Comprehensive VB .NET Debugging"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=128
Yes, I agree with all of that. My point, however, is that the documentation
around the word Nothing does not match what it does. That, in my book, is a
bug.
There are 3 pieces VS 2003, VB.NET & MS SQL. All Microsoft; all latest
versions. It is very hard to deal with these three pieces interpreting
Nothing differently, as they do. Dim x as Boolean = nothing is false in
VB.NET but translates to DBNull when a row is added to SQL. Does that make
any sense in any scenario? Not in my humble opinion.
Bob Day
versions <<
Well, VS 2003 has no opinion on any of this - it's just an IDE. MS SQL, on
the other hand, is a superset of ANSI SQL, so the way in which database
nulls are handled is not controlled by MS at all - hence the discrepancy
that you see.
HTH,
Mark
--
Author of "Comprehensive VB .NET Debugging"
http://www.apress.com/book/bookDisplay.html?bID=128
Yes, I agree with all of that. My point, however, is that the documentation
around the word Nothing does not match what it does. That, in my book, is a
bug.
There are 3 pieces VS 2003, VB.NET & MS SQL. All Microsoft; all latest
versions. It is very hard to deal with these three pieces interpreting
Nothing differently, as they do. Dim x as Boolean = nothing is false in
VB.NET but translates to DBNull when a row is added to SQL. Does that make
any sense in any scenario? Not in my humble opinion.
Bob Day