Re: dbsetlversion + DBVERSION_100

On Thu, 10 Nov 2011 13:54:43 +0100
LacaK <[email protected]> wrote:

> can you please add into dblib.c support for Sybase 10 and above in 
> dbsetlversion()

I'm slightly reluctant to apply this patch.  Let me just debate it with
you a moment.  Tell me where I go wrong.   

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/aa937064(SQL.80).aspx

dbsetlversion() is defined for Microsoft db-lib.  It supports 4.2
(maybe) and 7.0+.  

http://manuals.sybase.com/onlinebooks/group-cnarc/cng1110e/dblib/@Generic__BookTextView/39614;pt=39614

dbsetversion() is defined by Sybase.  It supports version 4.2 (maybe)
and 5.0.  

Your patch lets someone use the Microsoft function to set the Sybase
version.  It's OK; it will work.  But it's also a little strange, and
could be the product of confusion.  Will someone connecting to a Sybase
database expect Microsoft db-lib semantics?  Will they expect
dbdatecrack() to return months 1-12 instead of 0-11?  Will they expect
dbconvert() to handle decimal/numeric types?  Will they expect INT_EXIT
not to exit?  

The answer *might* be Yes.  One might have an application written for
Microsoft's db-lib that is now connecting to a Sybase database.  But
the reverse seems more likely, given market trends.  

I'm inclined to do the opposite:  to *exclude* the functions that only
Microsoft defined unless --with-msdblib was used.  

My question to you, then, is, Why not use dbsetversion()?  

--jkl