C
cverbiest
Guest
I would not allow a developer to rely on that, even if it appears to work. I'll take the risk of maybe misinterpreting the question. I think some developers would expext unkown where to throw an error. It's probably easier to find bugs if where = ? would throw an error. In our code a lot of find statements are with no-error so throwing an "unknown where clause" error would go undetected . I've think we could use a "allow-unavailable" option on find to replace the no-error option. This option would preserve errors such as 7254 (*) without throwing an error when there is no record. (*) community.progress.com/.../eliminate_error_7254_and_allow_all_methodproperty_implementations_in_where_clauses
Continue reading...
Continue reading...