[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: argument against using '() for null values? ([Chicken-users] DBI)
From: |
Graham Fawcett |
Subject: |
Re: argument against using '() for null values? ([Chicken-users] DBI) |
Date: |
Thu, 28 Feb 2008 09:27:20 -0500 |
On Wed, Feb 27, 2008 at 10:53 PM, Ozzi <address@hidden> wrote:
> > How is (sql-null?) harder or less intuitive?
> It's not harder, but not being able to use null? to test for NULL is
> counterintuitive in my eyes.
I know what you're saying. I guess I just like to keep my different
types of nulls in different baskets.
> Count me as on the fence I guess, between null void and sql-null.
Sitting on the fence between null and void sounds like a scary place to be. :-)
Graham
The Tao that can be tested
for equality with the Tao
is not the true Tao.
-- Chuang Tzu (paraphrased)
- Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, (continued)
- Re: argument against using '() for null values? ([Chicken-users] DBI), Graham Fawcett, 2008/02/27
- Re: argument against using '() for null values? ([Chicken-users] DBI), Ozzi, 2008/02/27
- Re: argument against using '() for null values? ([Chicken-users] DBI), Graham Fawcett, 2008/02/27
- Re: argument against using '() for null values? ([Chicken-users] DBI), Ozzi, 2008/02/27
- Re: argument against using '() for null values? ([Chicken-users] DBI),
Graham Fawcett <=
Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Alex Shinn, 2008/02/28
Re: [Chicken-users] DBI, Alaric Snell-Pym, 2008/02/28