Oliver Jowett wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 21, 2003 at 10:39:11AM -0400, Dmitry Tkach wrote:
>
>
>>Oliver Jowett wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Even if it was true, it's still better to have one piece of code that does
>>>the escaping, rather than N different ones. With escaping in the JDBC
>>>driver, you've reduced the scope of the code you need to audit for syntax
>>>
>>>
>>>from "all query strings and all parameters" to "the JDBC driver's
>>
>>
>>>parameter-escaping code and all query strings".
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Sure. And that's good.
>>That's precisely the point - if you guys start taking functionality
>>away, so that I am not longer able to do things with it that I used to
>>be able to do, then I will not be able to benefit from it as much as I
>>used to - I'll have to switch from PreparedStatements to Statements and
>>do all that escaping/parsing on my own.
>>That's exactly what I am trying to avoid
>>
>>
>
>The functionality we are "taking away" allows you to bypass the JDBC
>driver's parameter escaping. You can't have it both ways.
>
>
Sure, I can :-)
I *do* "have it both ways" right now :-) - in situations when I need
drivers escaping, I use it, in situations when I don't I don't.
I have both the functionality, and the flexibility not to use it when I
don't need it.
Dima
>
>
