Re: AW: AW: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] behavior of ' = NULL' vs. MySQL vs. S tand ards

2001-06-07 Thread Sergio Bruder
On Thu, Jun 07, 2001 at 02:46:50PM +0200, Tom Ivar Helbekkmo wrote: > Zeugswetter Andreas SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Thus it could be, that NULL in "where column = NULL" is not defined > > to have a special meaning according to SQL92. > > The way I interpret Celko's interpretation of

AW: AW: AW: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] behavior of ' = NULL' vs. MySQL vs. S tand ards

2001-06-07 Thread Zeugswetter Andreas SB
> > Thus it could be, that NULL in "where column = NULL" is not defined > > to have a special meaning according to SQL92. > > The way I interpret Celko's interpretation of SQL92, that specific > construct has a meaning; it evaluates to UNKNOWN, thus not to TRUE, Imho the text refers to a conte

Re: AW: AW: [HACKERS] Re: [SQL] behavior of ' = NULL' vs. MySQL vs. S tand ards

2001-06-07 Thread Tom Ivar Helbekkmo
Zeugswetter Andreas SB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Thus it could be, that NULL in "where column = NULL" is not defined > to have a special meaning according to SQL92. The way I interpret Celko's interpretation of SQL92, that specific construct has a meaning; it evaluates to UNKNOWN, thus not