On Thu, 13 May 2004, Dave Cramer wrote:
> Here's a patch for getUDT, I'll apply it if nobody complains..
>
It seems to have some problems, most notably the fact that we don't
support UDTs. Looking at the javadoc for this function you are returing
NULL for both class_name and data_type which doesn't look like it's
allowed as type_cat and type_schem explicitly state their ability to be
null. Without class_name and data_type what information are we really
returning? If you are really just returning plain type info, how is this
different/better than getTypeInfo().
If you want to implement it for the sake of implementing it, the docs
state, "Note: If the driver does not support UDTs, an empty result set is
returned." I belive this is the correct thing to do.
Kris Jurka