🚀 go-pugleaf

Please let me know, did I understand?

"Massimiliano Trezzi" <support_leavethis_@intesanet.it> ha scritto nel 
messaggio news:484a4b69@newsgroups.borland.com...
> Hi,
>
> Ok, suppose (only suppose) it's not a bug, is it a good thing?
> If you look all the thread you'll se I'm the only one who thinks so.
>
> I can't understand the last sentence:
>> There are too many move valuable things that R&D can spend time on to
>> invest their time in making IB support mixed mode joins.
>
> I translate it in my own spaghetti English:
> "We have so many things to work on that we cannot pay attention to this 
> issue"
> Is it so?
>
> Hi,
>
> Massimiliano
>
> "Bill Todd [TeamB]" <no@no.com> ha scritto nel messaggio 
> news:48497398@newsgroups.borland.com...
>> Massimiliano Trezzi wrote:
>>
>>>    It's a bug and it's clear that it's not designed to be so.
>>
>> "As designed" means as designed by the software engineers responsible
>> for the product. It may not work the way you want it to and it may not
>> work the way the SQL standard says it should but, as Quinn stated, it
>> does work the way the R&D team intended. Therefore, this behavior is
>> not a bug. If you disagree with this please look in any dictionary of
>> software engineering terms for the definition of a bug.
>>
>> I certainly agree with you that IB should be changed so that SQL that
>> does not execute correctly either does not execute at all or that it
>> does execute correctly. I do disagree with you in that I think the best
>> fix for IB is to generate an error message and not execute the SQL.
>> There are too many move valuable things that R&D can spend time on to
>> invest their time in making IB support mixed mode joins.
>>
>> -- 
>> Bill Todd (TeamB)
>
>