|
| From: | Ozzi |
| Subject: | Re: argument against using '() for null values? ([Chicken-users] DBI) |
| Date: | Wed, 27 Feb 2008 17:29:19 -0600 |
| User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Macintosh/20071031) |
I suggest that a row be an a-list, and that null columns be represented by being non-existent in the a-list. If you end up preferring a plain list or a vector, then use (void) instead -- I am trying to get this standardized as the Chicken representation of SQL's NULL.
Is there an argument against using '() instead of (void) SQL NULL values?
| [Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |