Dave Cramer wrote:
> I've changed direction to an array
Ok. What did you think about removing it entirely from the parameterlist
level? It just seems like extra complexity that doesn't need to be there..
> regarding the jdbc3 type conversion in registerOutParameter, an
> existing conversion (BIT to BOOLEAN) was there, do all of them need to
> be in jdbc2 ?
BOOLEAN is only defined in JDBC3, so that conversion needs to be in the
JDBC3 code or the driver won't build under JDBC2.
All the others should be in JDBC2 code.
>>>> You seem to have reverted your earlier changes and put back the
>>>> types/* classes -- why?
>>>>
>>>
>>> huh ? they should be in there in HEAD, I did remove the creation of an
>>> object, and went to static methods
>>>
> I moved them from to core/types, but they have always been there
Oh, ok, your patch didn't show those renames. I also thought you'd
removed the types/ stuff earlier, guess I misread your commit :/
I still think they are redundant and should be entirely removed. We can
do that afterwards though.
Why the repackaging?
-O
