Works for me.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruce Momjian [SMTP:maillist@candle.pha.pa.us]
> Sent: Monday, May 10, 1999 1:30 PM
> To: Michael J Davis
> Cc: Thomas G. Lockhart; PostgreSQL-development
> Subject: Re: [HACKERS] NULL = col
>
> > I realize that supporting Access97 is going to be a pain and somewhat
> > undesirable, but I think that there are a lot of people like me who
> choose
> > Access97 because it seemed to be the best tool for the job. I am not
> overly
> > satisfied with Access97 but it gets the job done. Now, I would like to
> use
> > a real database and I don't want to invest any more $ in Microsoft, so I
> > choose Postgres. I don't what to have to rewrite my entire front end,
> only
> > the back end. I have not yet found a tool to replace Access97 as a
> front
> > end. I am considering TK but creating and printing reports is very
> limited
> > and would take too long for me to migrate all of my reports to tk. This
> > said, I would really appreciate it if PostgreSQL would support Access97
> as a
> > front end. I am sure many will follow the same path if the we make
> Postgres
> > an easy and effective alternative to SQL Server.
> >
> > I would have a preference to have NULL = a_expr supported. Access97 has
> > problems without it. Of course, I am will to insert this change in my
> local
> > source tree.
>
> Maybe we only need to have it working where we have already added it,
> and not all over the place. We can release what we have, which hits %95
> of the NULL = col uses, and wait and see if people have problems trying
> to do this non-standard thing someplace else.
>
> --
> Bruce Momjian | http://www.op.net/~candle
> maillist@candle.pha.pa.us | (610) 853-3000
> + If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
> + Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026