From: | Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Kris Jurka <books(at)ejurka(dot)com> |
Cc: | Oliver Jowett <oliver(at)opencloud(dot)com>, "pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-jdbc(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: getXXX methods |
Date: | 2004-07-09 15:45:24 |
Message-ID: | 1089387924.1506.287.camel@localhost.localdomain |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-jdbc |
Well, I have an interesting problem...
Detecting that a value is greater than MaxLong?
If I parse it using Double.parseDouble, and it is greater than LongMax
by 1 or so, the value ends up actually being less due to rounding ?
Any suggestions?
Dave
On Thu, 2004-07-08 at 08:11, Dave Cramer wrote:
> I think that since the SQL spec is referenced at the end of the JDBC
> spec that it has some relevance. I just thought that in absence of a
> second, or third opinion this would suggest a course of action?
>
> Dave
> On Thu, 2004-07-08 at 02:50, Kris Jurka wrote:
> > On Wed, 7 Jul 2004, Dave Cramer wrote:
> >
> > > Ok, it appears (at least from my understanding) that Kris is correct
> > > here.
> > >
> > > I had a look at the sql2003 proposed spec (ISO/IEC 9075-2:2003(E)), and
> > > it states:
> >
> > Well the SQL spec and the JDBC spec are different things. I was basing
> > part of my argument on the SQL spec's logic and extending that to fill in
> > the holes in the JDBC spec, but I don't consider this definitive. I still
> > feel this is the right thing to do, but I don't want to close off the
> > discussion if people feel otherwise.
> >
> > Kris Jurka
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
--
Dave Cramer
519 939 0336
ICQ # 14675561
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Rein Reezigt | 2004-07-09 16:03:22 | unsuscribe |
Previous Message | Bill Chandler | 2004-07-09 15:18:48 | Re: Terrible performance after deleting/recreating indexes |