Will do. Do you think it should be the same for Rows.first and Rows.last? They currently return None if the record set is empty.
On Jun 1, 4:25 pm, mdipierro <mdipie...@cs.depaul.edu> wrote: > I agree. If you can send me a patch today, I will add it to 1.79.1 > > On Jun 1, 4:05 pm, "mr.freeze" <nat...@freezable.com> wrote: > > > > > I think these functions should always return a Rows object, even if it > > is empty. Currently they return an empty list if the record set is > > empty. Thoughts?
