Re: SQL: Inconsistent "order by"

["Carel Teijgeler" <coteijgeler@xxxxxxxxx>]

Does this also handle parameter markers, which was the origin of your problems, 
IIRC?

Thus ORDER BY ? and passing a field name to the marker.

Just curious.

Regards,
Carel Teijgeler.

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 19-11-02 at 15:00 rob@dekko.com wrote:

<SNIP>
>After many discussions with development, I think we have a solution to
>the problem you were seeing.  According to development and what is
>documented in the SQL Reference, the order by clause will accept a
>a column name, an integer or a sort-key expression.  I've confirmed with
>development that the integer must be in the form of a number and cannot
>be a host variable.  When the term integer-expression is used,
>then a number or a host variable or another numeric expression(X +Y)
>can be used as a parameter.
>The net is what you are seeing returned by your program is
>working as designed.
<MORE CUTTING>
>Additional Information:
>So what you are saying is that
>Order by :myvar
>is not an error.  It will not create a invalid sql state SQLSTT, nor an
>invalid SQL code SQLCOD.  However it is just ignored and any old sort
>order is used?
</SNIP>