| From: | Jon Earle <je_pgsql(at)kronos(dot)honk(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Nulls get converted to 0 problem |
| Date: | 2003-06-05 13:39:04 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.LNX.4.55.0306050931270.16042@kronos.honk.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Wed, 4 Jun 2003 terry(at)ashtonwoodshomes(dot)com wrote:
> Oracle *incorrectly* interprets blank (empty) strings as NULL. They are NOT
> the same. A string of zero characters is a string nonetheless. A NULL is
> "the absence of value", which equals nothing (theoretically not even another
> NULL).
If you're testing a value, you're testing to see if there's something in
there or not - what difference does it make if the variable contains 0, ""
or NULL?
Why not adhere to the practices inherent (and thus anticipated by
developers) in other languages (C comes to mind) where 0, NULL and "" are
equivalent?
Cheers!
--
Jon Earle
SAVE FARSCAPE http://www.savefarscape.com/
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Joel Rodrigues | 2003-06-05 13:52:00 | Re: regular expression question |
| Previous Message | Nigel J. Andrews | 2003-06-05 13:38:43 | large objects |